Find to disregard commas. Also use exact size.

Features wanted...
Post Reply
thecon
Posts: 75
Joined: 09 Nov 2015 19:08

Find to disregard commas. Also use exact size.

Post by thecon »

Hello,

Just something to make things a little faster.

If I want to search for a file that has exactly 781696 bytes, then I have to input
"at least 781696" and "at most 781696" to find it (in the size tab of the file find).

Two suggestions:
1) Insert another box saying "exactly" so that we do not have to input the size twice.
(or, use a fixed letter, such as "=" to one of the two boxes so that only one box has
to be filled).
2) If I right-click a filesize in the file catalog (not the find file) and I copy its data,
I get 781,696 instead of 781696. Now, if I paste it on the find file by size as it is
(i.e. "781,696" instead of "781696"), I get files of 781 bytes, not 781696 bytes.
Is there a way to disregard the commas and/or fullstops (depending on the regional
settings) on the file find? In any case, there are no files of with decimal points
after all.

Thanks!

jupe
Posts: 3462
Joined: 20 Oct 2017 21:14
Location: Win10 22H2 120dpi

Re: Find to disregard commas. Also use exact size.

Post by jupe »

2) Not sure if you mean the file list when you say the file catalog, but if you weren't aware already you can copy the size without commas via the smart right click menu:

https://www.xyplorer.com/release_15.40.php#CopySize
clip-15_06_18_15.33.png
To see the attached files, you need to log into the forum.

admin
Site Admin
Posts: 66366
Joined: 22 May 2004 16:48
Location: Win8.1, Win10, Win11, all @100%
Contact:

Re: Find to disregard commas. Also use exact size.

Post by admin »

You can use the size field selector right in the Name pattern box.e.g.:

Code: Select all

size:115747
I think this is the fastest way because you don't even have to switch to the Size tab (and later turn it off again).

thecon
Posts: 75
Joined: 09 Nov 2015 19:08

Re: Find to disregard commas. Also use exact size.

Post by thecon »

Thanks for both your replies. Especially for the first reply: How did I miss that??? As for the second reply, that's awesome, nice trick.

That effectively covers both requests, but if the author deems it feasible, then an "exact" box could be useful. Personally, i'm covered though :)

Post Reply