Why is Everybody so clueless on the importance of Desktop Search to the Masses?
-
-
@DigitalXeron said:
Now, before you say "What if someone's writing a book" -- here's what the authors I've seen do: They write each chapter (or even topic) in a file of it's own, and contain the whole book in it's own directory [,,,]
A real-life example with censored filenames =)
It's hard to be a computer geek and a wannabe fantasy author. I end up spending wayyyy too much time on tools facilitating authorship, so my current novel has a puny word count of...
$ perl countwords.pl767 xxxxxxx.tex
474 xxxxxxxxxxx.tex
504 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.tex
433 xxxxxxxxxxxxxx.tex
763 xxxxxxxxxxxx.tex
3107 xxxxxxxxxxxxxx.tex
809 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.tex
222 xxxxxxxxxxxxxx.tex
1093 xxxxxxxxxxxxx.tex
358 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.tex
418 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.tex
905 xxxxxxxxxxxx.tex
1265 xxxxxxxxxxxx.tex
754 xxxxx.tex
183 xxxxxxxx.tex
533 xxxxxxxxxxxx.tex12588 TOTAL
I'm not actually working on chapters, I'm working on scenes. It's much more flexible this way: I noticed my initial chapter numbering was very much alive...
Not many words in files, as you can see, and I'm even considering splitting that one 3000-word scene into two =)
The story is progressing slowly indeed, but I have a kick-ass multi-paradigm word count tool with complete annotation support, and an awesome LaTeX-based manuscript revisitation/reworking workflow! Basically, feed the LaTeX source to the processor with the manuscript layout, print it, make corrections by hand, then return to editing the files; other layouts can be easily produced from the exact same source...
-
Google is a GOOF
@DigitalXeron said:
However, due to your single-filed mindedness, SpectateSwamp, I doubt you'll understand/comprehend my post because you refuse to believe/accept anyone can have any more than 2-3 text document files on their computer.
Google Search Sucks. Who can rely on it. The introduction should READ "this search only does small files". How many results, for a certain word do you have? Don't know, you probably never will know for sure. Unless you try SSDS
No wonder everybody is so ClueLess. You poor sods have never ever seen Desktop Search. The Great Search Giant Google is a GOOF. Their DS is so bad compared to what I am used to. I can see why so few use it (MPS) A little more testing and I'll be ready for the next video.
Indexing should start right when I hit the index button. After changing files 30 or 40 times and re-indexing. That 30 seconds - to a minute seems SLOW. Maybe have another button that says "in 30 seconds run the damn indexer"
So my early research indicates GDS is crapware.
-
SpectateSwamp is FAIL
@SpectateSwamp said:
@DigitalXeron said:
However, due to your single-filed mindedness, SpectateSwamp, I doubt you'll understand/comprehend my post because you refuse to believe/accept anyone can have any more than 2-3 text document files on their computer.
Google Search Sucks. Who can rely on it. The introduction should READ "this search only does small files". How many results, for a certain word do you have? Don't know, you probably never will know for sure. Unless you try SSDS
No wonder everybody is so ClueLess. You poor sods have never ever seen Desktop Search. The Great Search Giant Google is a GOOF. Their DS is so bad compared to what I am used to. I can see why so few use it (MPS) A little more testing and I'll be ready for the next video.
Indexing should start right when I hit the index button. After changing files 30 or 40 times and re-indexing. That 30 seconds - to a minute seems SLOW. Maybe have another button that says "in 30 seconds run the damn indexer"
So my early research indicates GDS is crapware.
FAIL.
-
Slowly cracking
More personal insults are coming out of the swamp. Keep it up and he may actually start throwing profanities at everyone.
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
@DigitalXeron said:
However, due to your single-filed mindedness, SpectateSwamp, I doubt you'll understand/comprehend my post because you refuse to believe/accept anyone can have any more than 2-3 text document files on their computer.
Google Search Sucks. Who can rely on it. The introduction should READ "this search only does small files". How many results, for a certain word do you have? Don't know, you probably never will know for sure. Unless you try SSDS
No wonder everybody is so ClueLess. You poor sods have never ever seen Desktop Search. The Great Search Giant Google is a GOOF. Their DS is so bad compared to what I am used to. I can see why so few use it (MPS) A little more testing and I'll be ready for the next video.
Indexing should start right when I hit the index button. After changing files 30 or 40 times and re-indexing. That 30 seconds - to a minute seems SLOW. Maybe have another button that says "in 30 seconds run the damn indexer"
So my early research indicates GDS is crapware.
swamp youre an idiot. you clearly dont evemn understand the IDEA behind GDS, let alone the implementation of it. please do some research and learn about decent software and coding practices.
PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF GOD
may i also take time out to thank MPS for his supporting my tag. I bow to you, sir!
-
Verified by SSDS No wonder everybody is
confused! Unless you have never will know, for
the damn indexer So few use it MPS, A folder
little more testing google search only does
small files How many results, for the
introduction Great Search Sucks: taking down
Google desktop Search Sucks; only does small
files How many results, for the introduction
should READ this Search only does small files
How many results? Indexing; should READ this
Search only does small files How many
results?
-
@SpectateShit said:
Verified by SSDS No wonder everybody is
confused! Unless you have never will know, for
the damn indexer So few use it MPS, A folder
little more testing google search only does
small files How many results, for the
introduction Great Search Sucks: taking down
Google desktop Search Sucks; only does small
files How many results, for the introduction
should READ this Search only does small files
How many results? Indexing; should READ this
Search only does small files How many
results?I want your app. LOL. And you didn't tag it.
-
@SpectateShit said:
Verified by SSDS No wonder everybody is
confused! Unless you have never will know, for
the damn indexer So few use it MPS, A folder
little more testing google search only does
small files How many results, for the
introduction Great Search Sucks: taking down
Google desktop Search Sucks; only does small
files How many results, for the introduction
should READ this Search only does small files
How many results? Indexing; should READ this
Search only does small files How many
results?That is fantastic...I wonder if you could use our replies as input, and automatically generate nonsense questions for Swamp. It's not like he'll answer the real questions anyway....
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
Google Search Sucks. Who can rely on it. The introduction should READ "this search only does small files". How many results, for a certain word do you have? Don't know, you probably never will know for sure. Unless you try SSDS
No wonder everybody is so ClueLess. You poor sods have never ever seen Desktop Search. The Great Search Giant Google is a GOOF. Their DS is so bad compared to what I am used to. I can see why so few use it (MPS) A little more testing and I'll be ready for the next video.
Indexing should start right when I hit the index button. After changing files 30 or 40 times and re-indexing. That 30 seconds - to a minute seems SLOW. Maybe have another button that says "in 30 seconds run the damn indexer"
So my early research indicates GDS is crapware.
You are totally missing the point of what a Desktop Search actually is, these are tools designed to allow you to find files based on keywords such as filename or content and require minimal input as they run in the background and build their index while you are using your computer to do other things.
Under normal working conditions you edit, delete and create files and the contents get indexed in the background, you are not required or expected to deliberately force an index rebuild after making changes. Either way this has got to be easier than manually creating the fucking index yourself or merging all your files into one big sodding file!
Try editing several files in a tool like notepad, in several different folders and then see how quickly SSDS takes to merge the files into one and then find the correct term, now change one of the original files and how quick does SSDS work when you now have to manually merge all the files again (including the ones that didn't change).
I dare you to try the challenge I posted regarding searching the subversion source tree and compare the times from WDS, GDS and SSDS including indexing or merging in the case of SSDS.
For any sane individual 10,000 words is not a typical file size, this size would only be reached by the kind of moron who stores all of their e-mail in a single text file rather than in a useful place such as an e-mail application.
You must be suffering from some weird delusion by failing to realise that computing has moved on and people expect more from things than SSDS and that Desktop Search is a term in common use that has toss all to do with the myriad of pointless features you seem to think it means.
Just in case you haven't understood yet - Desktop Search mean 'Searching the file system for files, not searching a single sodding file', searching a single file is called 'searching a single file' not 'desktop search'.
-
Google No GOOD
@spenk said:
Under normal working conditions you edit, delete and create files and the contents get indexed in the background, you are not required or expected to deliberately force an index rebuild after making changes. Either way this has got to be easier than manually creating the fucking index yourself or merging all your files into one big sodding file!
100,000 byte limit. Isn't anybody else checking these stats. Or you just going to sit on your duffs waiting for the next educational video. Well it's comming and soon. Some babble about the directory structure and that is all they need. CRAP 1,000,000 files is still a Million files. They never get printed again. Back them up and Merge them to clean up your directory. How on earth can you visually see or find anything in those huge directories. The merge has defaults and happens very quickly. It is so fast I might have to do a screen re-shoot of the slow-mo playback. At 20,000,000CPS files merge fast. especially those with a 100,000 byte limit. Even a thousand of those files wouldn't take long. But you'll see. You'd be surprised at how poorly GDS finds and displays stuff. Not fast and furious like SSDS. No wonder people keep so little data. There has never been a tool that was worthwhile.
My pal the European Hooded Crow was by this afternoon. I did a short video clip. Want to see?
-
Questions never ASKED
@aleph said:
That is fantastic...I wonder if you could use our replies as input, and automatically generate nonsense questions for Swamp. It's not like he'll answer the real questions anyway....
They will be video answers. I have babbled here as much as MPS making lots of wild claims. It is those statements you haven't questioned me on that I'm interested in. Those are the Stone Cold Facts of Desktop Search. Not to be challenged. SSDS can find them. All I need to do is cut and paste all my statements into 1 HUGE file. Then find everywhere that someone has quoted me and paste that into another BIG file. Search and replace everything that is in BIG file with a blank line in HUGE file. What is left in Huge file are the undisputables. Any swampie up to this task. I might have to dig in the source.txt to do this one.
-
Questions never ASKED - Lessons Never learned
-
Spectate does have a point (I hate to admit) that some desktop search tools do have limitations on their ability to conduct a full text search of large documents. I have single text files from 15+ years ago that have 10s of thousands of words in them, so Google Search (for instance) could not properly index them. But there are tools known as 'Full Text Search' tools that do exactly what Spectate is refering to in his 'Desktop Search.' They do this quickly and easily
An interesting quote I found on Wikipedia: "When dealing with a small number of documents it is possible for the full-text search engine to directly scan the contents of the documents with each query a strategy called serial scanning. This is what some rudimentary tools, such as grep, do when searching."
From this quote we can see the Spectate has developed a Full Text search tool, a 'rudimentary' and archaic tool to be sure, that cannot properly be compared to most other Desktop Search tools.
So Spectate you win a battle. Your Desktop Search can do something that many desktop search tools can't (google desktop search for instance). But your goal of overcomming this problem with current desktop search tools is too little, too late. It has already been done. Better. Faster. Stronger. So ultimately you lose the war.
Dr. Phil
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
100,000 byte limit. Isn't anybody else checking these stats. Or you just going to sit on your duffs waiting for the next educational video. Well it's comming and soon. Some babble about the directory structure and that is all they need. CRAP 1,000,000 files is still a Million files. They never get printed again. Back them up and Merge them to clean up your directory. How on earth can you visually see or find anything in those huge directories. The merge has defaults and happens very quickly. It is so fast I might have to do a screen re-shoot of the slow-mo playback. At 20,000,000CPS files merge fast. especially those with a 100,000 byte limit. Even a thousand of those files wouldn't take long. But you'll see.
The point you seem determined to ignore is I do not want to fucking merge my files into one big fucking file. I want my files as separate files so I can use them as the were meant to be. How can I maintain my source code if it is merged? Why merge my previous presentations when they are fine as they are? Why merge my expenses when I am happy with them as they are now?
Please, for the love of any god you care to name tell me what the fucking point of merging my files into one big file that is useless to anything other than SSDS.
- I cannot compile source code if it is merged without having two copies - one merged and one not merged. Every edit requires me to re-merge.
- I cannot simply reply to or forward an e-mail without cutting and pasting if they are all merged.
- All my powerpoint files lose the layout and colours if I convert them to text and are useless once merged.
- All my pdfs lose their graphics and formatting if converted to text and are harder to locate if lumped together in one big file.
- How do I maintain my html, css, js files if they are merged into one?
- Why should I bother to 'gf' my mp3s when I can leave them alone and not be required to manually merge these things?
I really do not care how fast you think files merge (and I would love to see where you get figure like 20,000,000 cps from) because I do not want my files merged! If people have a million files (and I've no idea where you got that number from) then let them - why do you get to dictate how other people use their computer and how they store files. An organised directory structure keeps things in control, search tools help you locate things that may not fit easily into this structure - how can one big file be easier to use?
@SpectateSwamp said:
You'd be surprised at how poorly GDS finds and displays stuff. Not fast and furious like SSDS. No wonder people keep so little data. There has never been a tool that was worthwhile.
I think you will find GDS does an excellent job of searching for files, as does WDS which I tend to use. Fast and furious is another pointless statement, I do not want to hold enter down for 5 minutes watching irrelevant matches fly past, I want to type and get my results filtered as I type and with the possibility of using boolean searching if I need it.
People do not keep so little data - you are the one advocating deleting stuff and putting it on DVD to keep the number of files down - everybody else seems happy to use modern hard drive capacities to the fullest.
I do agree that if SSDS is a tool it certainly isn't worth while...
If you really want to try WDS or GDS properly do as I keep suggesting and try using them to search something like the subversion source code and then do the same with SSDS - then compare the convenience and performance.
-
Keep Videos short & files BIG
@DrPhil said:
An interesting quote I found on Wikipedia: "When dealing with a small number of documents it is possible for the full-text search engine to directly scan the contents of the documents with each query a strategy called serial scanning. This is what some rudimentary tools, such as grep, do when searching."
With minor modifications the Swamp Search could do this. A little tweaking of the Merge operation for those Selected files. Instead of putting the text out to the destination file. Treat the data like it came in at the standard file input line. If it is something that will make people happy. Then maybe somebody should add it.
You poor sobs don't cut and paste anything off the net for later. How SAD being limited to such itsy bitsy file sizes
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
You poor sobs don't cut and paste anything off the net for later.
Why would I? Bookmarks and del.icio.us are already useful enough.
@SpectateSwamp said:
How SAD being limited to such itsy bitsy file sizes
As if some MB was "itsy bitsy". Get over it, dammit! Not everybody keeps all their data in a single large file!
AFAIK, with this method you are essentially ignoring the entire purpose of a file system. What next? The SSDSFS (SpectateSwamp Desktop Search File System)?
-
itsy bitsy teenie weenie yellow polka dot ...
I just deleted 6,000 e-mails insulting my tiny (package/soldier/schlong/tool/etc) and now you're insulting my itsy bitsy file sizes!
Now I need counseling. I hope you're happy.
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
@DrPhil said:
An interesting quote I found on Wikipedia: "When dealing with a small number of documents it is possible for the full-text search engine to directly scan the contents of the documents with each query a strategy called serial scanning. This is what some rudimentary tools, such as grep, do when searching."
With minor modifications the Swamp Search could do this. A little tweaking of the Merge operation for those Selected files. Instead of putting the text out to the destination file. Treat the data like it came in at the standard file input line. If it is something that will make people happy. Then maybe somebody should add it.
You poor sobs don't cut and paste anything off the net for later. How SAD being limited to such itsy bitsy file sizes
You just don't get it. Your tool can only search TEXT files, the other Full Text Search tools can search ALL files. Until you modify your tool to search ALL files your tool is a useless as a eunuch. YOU LOSE.
-
@Renan_S2 said:
AFAIK, with this method you are essentially ignoring the entire purpose of a file system. What next? The SSDSFS (SpectateSwamp Desktop Search File System)?
It's the old 'if you only have a hammer then every problem is a nail' thing.
He has a tool that can only search a single file (not edit or anything else mind) therefore all problems have to be solved by merging files into one. Then because everything is in a single file the tool gets more features designed around single files...
This then becomes habit (madness?) and effectively becomes the only way any problem is approached - note the lack of a vb project for SSDS as it is only a single .txt file and every build requires creating a new project, pasting the source in and then building the .exe.
-
@spenk said:
He has a tool that can only search a single file (not edit or anything else mind)
Yep. His "tool" (as it has been said here: as useful as an eunuch) is nothing more than a bloated, crippled GREP. And I think that GREP might feel offended by being compared with his "search"...
-
@Renan_S2 said:
And I think that GREP might feel offended by being compared with his "search"...
I decided to try out Windows GREP and agree that it would be offended to be compared to SSDS. Even as a command line tool GREP is cross-platform compatible, more functional, easier to use, and faster to find results.
Wow Spectate, in another decade your tool might make it to the level of this outdated tool
-
@DrPhil said:
Wow Spectate, in another decade your tool might make it to the level of this outdated tool
Outdated?[root@Fonz1 OperaDownloads]# grep -V GNU grep 2.5.3 Copyright (C) 1988, 1992-2002, 2004, 2005 Free Software Foundation, Inc. This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Sure it's old, but the fact that it has received updates in 2005 would suggest that people still use it and it's not outdated yet. I find it to be the simplest Regex parser to use.
-
Just looking at my bookshelf here, wondering where I put my copy of "Hogfather" and, suddenly, I find myself wondering... does SpectateSwamp have books?
Or does he video them all in page by page and then burn them to save space?
If he does have books, has he ripped out all the pages from other books and stuck them in one big book that has tabs sticking out at various places?
No... stop thinking about it. This path leads to madness.
-
@DrPhil said:
Spectate does have a point (I hate to admit) that some desktop search tools do have limitations on their ability to conduct a full text search of large documents.
Agreed, I was surprised about that limit too. I can't believe the same people that laught at him when he says 300 gigabytes of text is ridiculous will say that over 10,000 words in a file is ridiculous.
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
100,000 byte limit
I agree with you that GDS's limit is ridiculous. However, try some other software then... (http://www.copernic.com/en/products/desktop-search/faq.html)
You see, the point is: You're saying that GDS is crap, because it is limited (file size/number of words or whatever) and does not meet your needs. At the same time you fail to accept that we consider your tool crap, because it is limited (doesn't search file types, merging files needed) and does not meet anybody's needs.
Why not just accept that you've written the perfect tool for yourself, which is completely useless to the rest of the world? Just like you refuse to use GDS, we refuse to use SSDS. And that's our right.
However, I do not accept the fact that you keep saying your SSDS is the best search tool in the world when it is not! See above link.
-
Swamp shack would, just this is very large files. Is mine simple available? and there in todays vid everybody keeps crying and crying and drop of merge cheesieswamp or so. The program - there isnt much. Somebody else about is confused, he might need more. That spectateshit is drag, and this stuff would start with some video demoing my external drive do. Verified by ssds are on given line at time. With google takedown will you want to do and drop of my cam studio if they get to make it is 110?
Couldn't resist having a go myself. Scary.
Why don't posts made in Safari have line breaks? This is nuts.
-
ssds like in todays vid. everybody keeps crying and bad bad bad coding habits.
IT KEEPS SAYING EVERYONE IS CRYING!
with blanks both ways the context lines and mis represent me.
everybody keeps crying for ssds to make them look not hard drives.
there isnt much for the program matches on items on drive except c\temp\ then you aint working reload.
keeping the _. have some video backups when use just few files are on items on given line. what the daily wtf. you want to wipe your pet app.
Beautiful. Just beautiful.
-
@Lingerance said:
Sure it's old, but the fact that it has received updates in 2005 would suggest that people still use it and it's not outdated yet. I find it to be the simplest Regex parser to use.
You know, when I really think of it, I have to say that every piece of software development wisdom I've learned that really matters comes from the developer quotes in Ultima game series. They have one piece of wisdom that really covers this whole thread. In its entirety.
There's nothing wrong with 'grep' - what did you ---- up?
—- Rob (Ultima VIII quotes)
-
SSDS beyond GREP
@Lingerance said:
@DrPhil said:
It would be nice to see which was first VAX/Search or Grep. The Digital Equipment search was available by 84 or 1985. I'm sure grep was from before 1988 Somebody must know? SSDS (real search) open sourced 2008Wow Spectate, in another decade your tool might make it to the level of this outdated tool
Outdated?[root@Fonz1 OperaDownloads]# grep -V GNU grep 2.5.3
Copyright (C) 1988, 1992-2002, 2004, 2005 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO
warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Sure it's old, but the fact that it has received updates in 2005 would suggest that people still use it and it's not outdated yet. I find it to be the simplest Regex parser to use.
Todays video lession will demonstrate how poorly GDS searches. We'll use SSDS in pause mode to automatically fire the search strings into the clipboard. A quick Ctrl/V to search. (Almost hands free - No typing anyway). Wait a few seconds the Ctrl/V, Wait Ctrl/V ... Then maybe a 2nd one showing SSDS results for the same character strings. If the 100,000 character limit didn't take Google Down then this video set will.
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
It would be nice to see which was first VAX/Search or Grep.
Use of a certain search engine beginning with 'G' and the words "grep history" pulled up this in about 2 seconds...
"Grep is listed in the Manual for Version 4 Unix which is dated November, 1973. The date given for the creation of grep is March 3, 1973."
You see, the internet and searching and stuff like that is quite easy when you know how...
-
SSDS Smacks Down GREP & VAX/Search
@Benn said:
@SpectateSwamp said:
It would be nice to see which was first VAX/Search or Grep.
Use of a certain search engine beginning with 'G' and the words "grep history" pulled up this in about 2 seconds... "Grep is listed in the Manual for Version 4 Unix which is dated November, 1973. The date given for the creation of grep is March 3, 1973." You see, the internet and searching and stuff like that is quite easy when you know how...I'm surprised by that early of a date for GREP. I was running programs that used Punch Cards back then. Search was around before it was needed, that's for sure. Thanks BennieSwamp
SSDS started off mirroring the Vax search. I'm sure GREP and Vax/Search have most of the same options that SSDS has. Those other searches were far to complex to morph in to Video and music search like Swamp Search has. The Prompt search video from today will just lengthen SSDS's SmackDown lead.
-
Mr. Swamp, I have a question about the screenshot you posted above. It's obviously a screenie of your Google Video statistics, but I have to admit I have absolutely no clue what the numbers mean, since the column captions aren't included in the picture. What exactly do the numbers mean? Why is the number 3 circled? Without these details, the picture is cryptic indeed. Remember, not everyone has submitted material to Google Video and thus have some sort of way to seeing such statistics page and understanding what the numbers mean.
-
Questions never ASKED - Lessons Never learned
@WWWWolf said:
Mr. Swamp, I have a question about the screenshot you posted above. It's obviously a screenie of your Google Video statistics, but I have to admit I have absolutely no clue what the numbers mean, since the column captions aren't included in the picture. What exactly do the numbers mean? Why is the number 3 circled? Without these details, the picture is cryptic indeed. Remember, not everyone has submitted material to Google Video and thus have some sort of way to seeing such statistics page and understanding what the numbers mean.
sorry - the 3 is the number of file downloads. I'll redo the screen capture right away with the all time totals for each video. Communications are good.
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
@WWWWolf said:
What exactly do the numbers mean? Why is the number 3 circled?
sorry - the 3 is the number of file downloads. I'll redo the screen capture right away with the all time totals for each video. Communications are good.
Erm... why are you showing us a screenshot of this, exactly?
-
SSDS NO Limits
@rc_pinchey said:
Erm... why are you showing us a screenshot of this, exactly?
No Reason. I'll keep it up to date. Change is Good
-
Never Endum Thread
I was going to give you all SHIT. But I won't
You are contributing. eg. the 10,000 word Google limit verifying my claim:
its GDS 100,000 character MAX limit VS Swamp Search 300,000,000,000 + UNKNOWN limit. (SmackDown bell rings)
The ODD one of you taking the Swamp Search side now and again. (take a bow) Now get going. How about some video demos (MUSIC?) intermixed with some local bad video. 1337 HaH. The Never Endum Thread. Once the SmackDowns start coming from the SwampRats (Year of the Rat - Spectate Swamp is a RAT) Then I can just sit back watch, enjoy and learn.
Dr. Phil you are picking up. But a visit to Swamp Shack is recommended. (Headline - Dr Phil ordered to Swamp Shack)
The constant challenges have resulted in me testing the code out and finding the timing bug. Couldn't slow things down for less than 1/100 of a second. The change worked and I can now set it to about 1/300 of a second (and quicker). Which is a nicer speed. There were 2 identical sets of code with this timer that I had to change (check source). The 2nd one involved Slo-Motion. I'll have to test Slo-Mo Again. It has improved. Thanks.
What's WDS and YaHoo file size limits? Who's the NEXT TakeDown Challenger?
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
@rc_pinchey said:
Erm... why are you showing us a screenshot of this, exactly?
No Reason. I'll keep it up to date. Change is GoodAlright then.
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
SSDS started off mirroring the Vax search. I'm sure GREP and Vax/Search have most of the same options that SSDS has.
Again, the online-version-of-search-that's-nowhere-near-as-good-as-SSDS instantly clues me in on the VMS search utility . What's interesting is that the VMS search searched files , and allows (like grep) for non-matches, line numbers and the rest. I don't think SSDS is quite at that stage yet. Please too, read up about Regular Expressions before you mention SSDS and grep in the same sentence again.
As it happens, I suspect that this whole thread is simply about the fact that you miss the command line. Did you know that you can still access a DOS prompt from whatever Windows you've got? Have you ever played with Linux shells? Mate - you'd love it - *just* like being back in the '70's...
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
Swamp Search 300,000,000,000 + UNKNOWN limit.
How do you explain the video here then - http://forums.thedailywtf.com/forums/p/7593/144805.aspx#144805 which shows SSDS failing to work with a large file?
Also how do you search a file system that contains multiple files? This is what most people (i.e. everybody but you) want a search tool to do.
-
Screen Re-Shoot using Cam Studio
@Benn said:
Have you ever played with Linux shells? Mate - you'd love it - *just* like being back in the '70's...
the 70's Ten straight years of May long weekend Keggers in Jasper park - 24 kegs 2 miles in the bush. Bring your own mug. They couldn't stop it. When the park cops find one keg (and they did - a party goer just carried it off into the bushes) we would move and unbury the next. Tackle football among the bolders. You just can't hurt drunks. The beer is better now.
Still haven't done that search comparison video. I'll do a screen re-shoot of Cam Studio showing the various random search strings being jammed against GDS and even more random searches fired at SSDS. The results will astound you.
-
@SpectateDork said:
Dr. Phil you are picking up. But a visit to Swamp Shack is recommended. (Headline - Dr Phil ordered to Swamp Shack)
Wow - you really do only listen (read) what you want to hear. I told you, you've lost. I'm not picking up anything from you resembling sanity.
Tell me why do you continue to focus on tools:
@SpectateDork said:
What's WDS and YaHoo file size limits? Who's the NEXT TakeDown Challenger?
that do not even reflect what your tool does. Please refer back to my post above:
@DrPhil said:
From this quote we can see the Spectate has developed a Full Text search tool, a 'rudimentary' and archaic tool to be sure, that cannot properly be compared to most other Desktop Search tools.
-
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
its GDS 100,000 character MAX limit VS Swamp Search 300,000,000,000 + UNKNOWN limit. (SmackDown bell rings)
Yet your program failed, as shown here, to work with the Linux kernel source.
-
Out Grepping the Grepplers
@DrPhil said:
Wow - you really do only listen (read) what you want to hear. I told you, you've lost. I'm not picking up anything from you resembling sanity.
Dr Dr Calm down. You've had a relapse. All this Search knowledge can be a little overwhelming. Have a nap.
-
I don't exactly want to contribute to the spaghetti, but I just can't resist tossing this out. The VB timer has inherent limitations. Want precision? Check out the SetTimer and KillTimer API functions.
-
Not to mention that <font face="Courier New">ed</font> existed and had the <font face="Courier New">g</font> and <font face="Courier New">p</font> commands at least since March 11, 1971, as evident from the [url=http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/cs/who/dmr/man12.pdf]Unix manual[/url].
-
dumb OLD timer
@AbbydonKrafts said:
That's exactly the type of response I've been looking for. Give me a code sample and I'll put it in. AbbySwamp. The timer limitations never seemed a problem for SSDS until I tried to show off the scrolling text. What the Hey I couldn ' t speed it up past 100 per second. Did I need a new computer or what? Just the dumb OLD timer was all.I don't exactly want to contribute to the spaghetti, but I just can't resist tossing this out. The VB timer has inherent limitations. Want precision? Check out the SetTimer and KillTimer API functions.
-
@SpectateSwamp said:
Give me a code sample and I'll put it in.
Easier said than done. API timers require a module with a callback procedure. It can't be in a form. Also, when the procedure is called, it would have to perform the update steps back at the form. With your current "structure", it would take a lot of work to implement. Find more info here.
-
Hey Swamp,
You say it's open source. What license is it released under?
