f9dc86836d
We have a pile of documentation describing how to rebuild the built in language analyzers and, previously, our documentation testing framework made sure that the examples successfully built *an* analyzer but they didn't assert that the analyzer built by the documentation matches the built in anlayzer. Unsuprisingly, some of the examples aren't quite right. This adds a mechanism that tests that the analyzers built by the docs. The mechanism is fairly simple and brutal but it seems to be working: build a hundred random unicode sequences and send them through the `_analyze` API with the rebuilt analyzer and then again through the built in analyzer. Then make sure both APIs return the same results. Each of these calls to `_anlayze` takes about 20ms on my laptop which seems fine. |
||
|---|---|---|
| .. | ||
| analyzers | ||
| charfilters | ||
| tokenfilters | ||
| tokenizers | ||
| analyzers.asciidoc | ||
| anatomy.asciidoc | ||
| charfilters.asciidoc | ||
| normalizers.asciidoc | ||
| testing.asciidoc | ||
| tokenfilters.asciidoc | ||
| tokenizers.asciidoc | ||