XYplorer Beta Club

ivan wrote:

admin wrote:Give an example, please.

OK, here is one:
1. You're searching for ".a?b?." in the content of a file and you find it.
2. Using similar possible scripting command to rename (capitalise the chars in the pattern) :

Code: Select all

rename s, ".a?b?./.A?B?."

As you can see, the initial part of finding matches to the wildcards-included pattern is the same. What you do after, however, is different.

Well, I think I don't have to explain that this is whole different deal from simply determining whether a string matches a pattern.

admin wrote:Well, I think I don't have to explain that this is whole different deal from simply determining whether a string matches a pattern.

I think you do. How different is search for a string in a file from searching for a string in the file name?

ivan wrote:

admin wrote:Well, I think I don't have to explain that this is whole different deal from simply determining whether a string matches a pattern.

I think you do. How different is search for a string in a file from searching for a string in the file name?

No, imo, he doesn't have to explain it any futher...you've obviously not done much/any programming...there are times when a function/routine that may appear to user to be similar are totally different behind the scenes...if and when Don wishes to make changes to do what you desire, that will be totally up to him...I've learned that in many cases, the more pressure we apply, the less likely we are to get what we want, ok?

ivan wrote:

admin wrote:Well, I think I don't have to explain that this is whole different deal from simply determining whether a string matches a pattern.

I think you do. How different is search for a string in a file from searching for a string in the file name?

obviously it is different or it would work already

j_c_hallgren wrote: No, imo, he doesn't have to explain it any futher...you've obviously not done much/any programming...there are times when a function/routine that may appear to user to be similar are totally different behind the scenes...if and when Don wishes to make changes to do what you desire, that will be totally up to him...I've learned that in many cases, the more pressure we apply, the less likely we are to get what we want, ok?

I am actually a software engineer of various object-oriented and web languages so, in a way, that remark of yours offends me. Without knowing what's going on behind the scenes, how is a user supposed to know that it's totally different especially if it is very similar to what is already present. I recognise that if and when is entirely up to Don, but I believe that questioning the reasoning and asking for explanation shouldn't be frowned upon.

In fact, I am firmly of the view that the more pressure is applied by more people then that's a clear indication of great customer need. And, reversing the methodology you suggest, if we don't post anything at all in the Wishes section then everything that we may desire will be implemented and I fail to see logic there.

eurytos wrote:obviously it is different or it would work already

I beg to differ. Don just needs to "flick the switch" aka enable it and then it would work. Currently, it's incremental so some parts of XY have it and others don't.

ivan wrote:... In fact, I am firmly of the view that the more pressure is applied by more people then that's a clear indication of great customer need. ...

Dude, putting pressure on somebody is something I strongly resent. Don should be simply made aware of what bugs exists and what user needs. Its upto him to figure out how to work it out and you don't have to pressurize him to do stuff for you or for others. And in this case when he has already told that those two searches work differently, why pester him? Please have patience.

gosh... okay to end this, you can simply read about and use regexp to do such thing, e.g.

serendipity wrote:Dude, putting pressure on somebody is something I strongly resent. Don should be simply made aware of what bugs exists and what user needs. Its up to him to figure out how to work it out and you don't have to pressurize him to do stuff for you or for others. And in this case when he has already told that those two searches work differently, why pester him? Please have patience.

Please don't think of pressure as something bad but instead as motivational, a lot of the time people work better when some degree of pressure is applied. Yes, he said that the two searches work differently but he hasn't explained why so my understanding of them extends only as far as the surface and on the surface they appear very similar indeed.

jacky wrote:gosh... okay to end this, you can simply read about and use regexp to do such thing, e.g.

Code: Select all

rename r, "\.a(.)b(.)\.>.A$1B$2.";

Using RegExp instead of Search & Replace would require an enormous re-engineering of my script. Additionally, this raises a question of why are wildcards supported in RegExp but not in S & R? Furthermore, them being supported in S & R is better because wildcards differ from regular expressions in that they generally only express very limited forms of alternatives.

ivan wrote:

jacky wrote:gosh... okay to end this, you can simply read about and use regexp to do such thing, e.g.

Code: Select all

rename r, "\.a(.)b(.)\.>.A$1B$2.";

Using RegExp instead of Search & Replace would require an enormous re-engineering of my script. Additionally, this raises a question of why are wildcards supported in RegExp but not in S & R? Furthermore, them being supported in S & R is better because wildcards differ from regular expressions in that they generally only express very limited forms of alternatives.

I don't mean to pick on you here so don't take it harshly. But, rather than re-work one script you would prefer Don to modify XY which will then require countless hours of tweaking and updating before it is all over? I could understand pushing for this if it was not already possible to accomplish what you want. I know, I know, it isn't presented in the manner you would prefer, but the ability is there.

As to your question, I would guess regexp supports wildcards because the regexp classes do by by default. I could be wrong (I am a lot of the time) so don't quote me on that. Also, regexp can be as narrowly focused as you want it to be, it just takes a little while to learn.

eurytos wrote:I don't mean to pick on you here so don't take it harshly. But, rather than re-work one script you would prefer Don to modify XY which will then require countless hours of tweaking and updating before it is all over?

This didn't seem to be an issue when incorporating full Unicode support. Before it was implemented and if someone suggested it would your question have been: "rather than reinstall your OS with English as default language you would prefer Don to modify XY which will then require countless hours of tweaking and updating before it is all over?". I am not trying to be silly about it, to me it seems that wildcard implementation hasn't seeped very deep into XY and I'd like for XY to be soaked in it, so to speak.

ivan wrote:

eurytos wrote:I don't mean to pick on you here so don't take it harshly. But, rather than re-work one script you would prefer Don to modify XY which will then require countless hours of tweaking and updating before it is all over?

This didn't seem to be an issue when incorporating full Unicode support. Before it was implemented and if someone suggested it would your question have been: "rather than reinstall your OS with English as default language you would prefer Don to modify XY which will then require countless hours of tweaking and updating before it is all over?". I am not trying to be silly about it, to me it seems that wildcard implementation hasn't seeped very deep into XY and I'd like for XY to be soaked in it, so to speak.

You respond to fast! I was coming back to remove my post because there wasn't anything constructive about it. Oh well, sorry about dragging this OT. I will keep my yap shut for awhile.

ivan wrote:

j_c_hallgren wrote: No, imo, he doesn't have to explain it any futher...you've obviously not done much/any programming

I am actually a software engineer of various object-oriented and web languages so, in a way, that remark of yours offends me. Without knowing what's going on behind the scenes, how is a user supposed to know that it's totally different especially if it is very similar to what is already present. I recognise that if and when is entirely up to Don, but I believe that questioning the reasoning and asking for explanation shouldn't be frowned upon.

I really don't want to drag this out, but I feel I must...sorry.

Ok, in that case, if you're doing programming, then you should even more understand that when Don says that it's different, that it is, and also that he shouldn't need to spend time here explaining in detail why...you asked for an explanation and he said it was not the same and that's good enough for me for now...repeatly pressing the issue likely won't help your cause.

ivan wrote:In fact, I am firmly of the view that the more pressure is applied by more people then that's a clear indication of great customer need. And, reversing the methodology you suggest, if we don't post anything at all in the Wishes section then everything that we may desire will be implemented and I fail to see logic there.

Having more people express the same wish does indeed help, but I've seen already where putting more pressure on Don to do something he's not wanting to caused him to resent it and just say NO, and that isn't what you want to happen, right? Posting a Wish and if needed, a little gentle prodding later isn't the same thing.

Have there been times when I've disagreed with Don about how something was done or not done? Sure...more than once...but I've also become a very solid defender of him based on overall experience since starting to interact here...so when I see someone that appears to be picking on him, even politely, I'll generally try to support his position here.

j_c_hallgren wrote:

ivan wrote:In fact, I am firmly of the view that the more pressure is applied by more people then that's a clear indication of great customer need. And, reversing the methodology you suggest, if we don't post anything at all in the Wishes section then everything that we may desire will be implemented and I fail to see logic there.

Having more people express the same wish does indeed help, but I've seen already where putting more pressure on Don to do something he's not wanting to caused him to resent it and just say NO, and that isn't what you want to happen, right? Posting a Wish and if needed, a little gentle prodding later isn't the same thing.

Just to make sure: When I say "NO" instead of "no" it's not because of pressure but because I still think "no" and apparently have to express my thoughts LOUDER to be understood. Pressure alone does not change my opinion about something. However, when many poeple repeatedly ask for some feature I will reconsider it. This has been the case for example with Color Filters: I was against them first, but then let people "persuade" me to add them, and now I cannot live without them anymore. Yep, I'm able to learn.

When I said "I think I don't have to explain ..." that was a literal statement wrapped in a rhetorical statement. I assumed the answer is obvious (namely: No, no need to explain.) to people with a little programming background; but IF then answer would be "Yes, do explain!" then there would be the literal reading: "I don't have to explain anything here."