Adding suffix 'field' to classes inheriting IndexBase - #296

A couple of points:

1. The terminology that we're using is Attribute rather than Field to generalize both JSON and Hash. I believe that we're using this terminology in our public documentations (if not, we should).
2. I think that the it makes sense to also include the following changes:
   2.1. IndexBase -> AttributeBase , note that it's already using the namespace valkey_search::indexes
   2.2. IndexerType , kIndexerTypeByStr, etc -> AttributeType, ...

WDYT?

Well, I'm 100% in favor of consistency. The Redis documents also use the term Attribute in many places. While I personally find field more usable than attribute, IDC which we end up with as long as it's consistently applied.

1. I believe 'Field' is used more in this context as i have seen in Valkey code https://github.com/search?q=repo%3Avalkey-io%2Fvalkey+attribute&type=code vs https://github.com/search?q=repo%3Avalkey-io%2Fvalkey+field&type=code. I didn't find Attribute being used in the documentation as well. But in valkey-search I understand that we have been using 'Attribute' in this context. lmk if i am wrong. Keeping that in mind are you saying it should rather be called 'TagAttribute' or 'NumericAttribute' rather than using 'TagField' or 'NumericField' to be in line with terminology currently being used.

2. Agreed will add these changes as well.

Keeping that in mind are you saying it should rather be called 'TagAttribute' or 'NumericAttribute' rather than using 'TagField' or 'NumericField' to be in line with terminology currently being used.

Correct.

2. Agreed will add these changes as well.

SG!

Did we abandon this? If so, let's close it

Did we abandon this? If so, let's close it

No haven't abandoned this, just caught up with some fulltext work currently, will update pr soon, once have some extra time

Update or close please.

closing. stale