|
I dare you to keep a straight face and tell me you haven't been engaging in warm up celebrations. I know you prefer to play it safe and not throw yourself into things without limbering up first.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
|
How can i delete this account?
|
|
|
|
|
You just did.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
This seems to be the night for having wild thoughts about CP's search facility: perhaps it's the full moon ? I had just come back from shaving my tongue, when this idea came to me via moonbeams.
What if, I imagined, you could drill-down on results of a CP search, drill down any number of times, with an enhanced choice of search options available ?
So, you do your first search, casting a wide net; the results appear: a CheckBox appears which, if checked, means your next search is done within the results of the first search, and some advanced search options are exposed.
And, you can keep a-drilling-down until you hit ... whatever.
That idea actually seemed worth posting here, although, of course, I have no idea to what extent the native structure of CP's giant databases would facilitate a drill-down model.
But, did I stop there, and go running out in the night to frighten the local dogs ? No: further lunacy ensued as I imagined what meta-syntax might be used to achieve advanced drill-down in a C# infused with generics flavor:
So, Dear Readers, respected colleagues, peers, mentors, and technical far-betters: read from hence further, only if the moon also has increased your tolerance for fantasia: what Dante described written over the passageway to enter Hell ... "abandon hope all ye, who enter here" ... "lasciate ogni esperanza, voi che intracte" ... applies:
The idea of having a somewhat C# (generic flavour) meta-search syntax... when there's already the whole edifice complex of RegEx far out-to-sea ... is a bit grandiose, but let me float the boat, anyhow:
{} used to delimit the start and end of meta-search comoponents. Within a meta-search comoponent individual constructs separated by commas are equivalent to using "AND:" i.e., in CP search now what is expressed by "struct AND Tuple," in this syntax is expressed by "struct, tuple"
"Result:" indicates some filter on the totality of search results
struct {o:datecreated.descending, gb.a:[Pat*yn, O'Hanlon, Janova, Dietrich, Aptroot, MacCutchan, Abhinav, Kramer, Nischalke, OriginalGriff], d>=:01/11/09, tags:[c#], u:generics} & { filterby: a.rating.authority is platinum, filterby: Result.bookmarks.count > 2 }
0. each result must contain the word "struct"
1. o:datecreated.descending:
results are presented in order by date-created descending
2. gb.a:[Pat*yn, O'Hanlon, Janova, Dietrich, Aptroot, MacCutchan, Abhinav, Kramer, Nischalke, OriginalGriff]
the results will be grouped into two groups: the first group will include posts by the authors named in the list. the second group will contain all the other results not by those authors in the first group that match all the other criteria
3. d>=:01/11/09
each result created after November 1, 2009
4. tags:[c#]
must be tagged c# ... this is also valid: tags:[c#, linq]
5. u:generics
somewhere in the result is a mention of Linq, or use of some aspect of generics in code (tall order this one !)
6. And in addition to all of above criteria: second {} meta-search component is ANDed with the results of applying criteria 1~5:
a. filterby: a.rating.authority is platinum
the author's rating as authority is platinum
b. filterby: Result.bookmarks.count > 2
entire result set is filtered to include results which have been
bookmarked at least twice
"For no man lives in the external truth among salts and acids, but in the warm, phantasmagoric chamber of his brain, with the painted windows and the storied wall." Robert Louis Stevenson
modified 12-Dec-11 17:55pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Bill,
1.
I'll have a second T, thank you.
2.
Most browsers have a BACK button, that could bring you back to your earlier search, the one you want to refine.
3.
I don't see a need for all those complex things you talked about. CP Search is pretty good as it is, provided you sort by date, and not by relevance. The calculated relevance isn't any good IMO.
4.
CP Search should first and fore all be simple, if not we will get even more questions where enquirers fail to search and find what they seek.
|
|
|
|
|
Just along for the ride.
"the meat from that butcher is just the dogs danglies, absolutely amazing cuts of beef." - DaveAuld (2011)
"No, that is just the earthly manifestation of the Great God Retardon." - Nagy Vilmos (2011)
|
|
|
|
|
LP: "I'll have a second T, thank you."
Done: via wild-card
LP: "Most browsers have a BACK button, that could bring you back to your earlier search, the one you want to refine."
Which browser is it that lets me do a new search on only the results returned from the previous search ?
LP: "I don't see a need for all those complex things you talked about. CP Search is pretty good as it is, provided you sort by date, and not by relevance. The calculated relevance isn't any good IMO."
While the second part of my long-winded post is just a fantasia, a lunar frippery, I hoped it might suggest, by contrast, how simple the first part of the post, suggesting the ability to search within the results of a previous search ... is.
I think drill-down search is solid idea, well-worked out for a long-time now, and a facility available within many technical and scholarly databases. And, under-the-hood, since almost every database is going to return a DataSet result for a search, I believe the implementation of simply re-using that DataSet for the next search should not be of dauntingly expensive technical cost.
LP: "CP Search should first and fore all be simple, if not we will get even more questions where enquirers fail to search and find what they seek."
I believe that being able to search within the results of a previous search will contribute to simplicity of use, just as do the collapsible/expandable nodes of a TreeView that contain child-nodes, or master-detail implementations in database views.
I think the idea of multiple filtering, winnowing, from "wide" to "narrow," is an inherently "natural" mode of cognitive activity, and solidly grounded in many real-world behaviors from panning for gold, to threshing wheat, to distilling spirits multiple times, to flaking stone tools 50,000 years ago from rough outlines, to final pointed spear-tips, for sticking in mammoths
Thanks for you considered response !
best, Bill
"For no man lives in the external truth among salts and acids, but in the warm, phantasmagoric chamber of his brain, with the painted windows and the storied wall." Robert Louis Stevenson
|
|
|
|
|
Search is a project we're going to revisit next year. Providing drill down functionality is on the list. Maybe in a slightly different manner than you're thinking.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
I deleted an answer of mine and suddenly went up by around 2k points.
Caching issue or a bug?
|
|
|
|
|
It must have been a really bad answer for you to get rewarded like that.
|
|
|
|
|
No it was not a very good answer in any case.
Too much of heaven can bring you underground
Heaven can always turn around
Too much of heaven, our life is all hell bound
Heaven, the kill that makes no sound
|
|
|
|
|
Abhinav S wrote: I deleted an answer of mine and suddenly went up by around 2k points.
Really? I'm going to delete mine 
Check your Reputation history
|
|
|
|
|
thatraja wrote: Check your Reputation history
I did. No changes there.
Too much of heaven can bring you underground
Heaven can always turn around
Too much of heaven, our life is all hell bound
Heaven, the kill that makes no sound
|
|
|
|
|
There was a bit of cleanup going on - could be you're seeing the combined effects.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project | Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
It was a positive effect so I'm definitely not complaining.
Thanks for the update.
Too much of heaven can bring you underground
Heaven can always turn around
Too much of heaven, our life is all hell bound
Heaven, the kill that makes no sound
|
|
|
|
|
Chris I saw the similar effect just now after deleted my duplicate answer 
|
|
|
|
|
I found myself wondering, today, why I have made such an infrequent use of the bookmark facility on CP: I'm having to constantly re-search for certain articles that are often relevant to cite/link-to in answering questions on QA. But, I couldn't come up with any excuse !
But, the thought after that was that it would be useful to view search results sorted on "most bookmarked."
Actually, the most interesting thing I can "dream of," vis-a-vis bookmarks on CP, would be having public access to other user's bookmarks, but that's probably something that would involve a privacy issue, and implementing a mechanism where the bookmarker could chose, per bookmark created, to make that public or private ... well ... who knows how much work that would create for CP, or whether that would really be valuable to a lot of people ?
However, the final thought, re bookmarks, was that within a given discussion forum, or QA, if I could see posts sorted by most bookmarked, that could be quite useful, perhaps as useful as seeing the already provided info about ratings or votes.
Just some more ideas to throw on the fire.
best, Bill
"For no man lives in the external truth among salts and acids, but in the warm, phantasmagoric chamber of his brain, with the painted windows and the storied wall." Robert Louis Stevenson
|
|
|
|
|
Every once in a while I want to search for a message I posted a while back.
Shouldn't there be the ability to search among them from the "My Messages" page?
|
|
|
|
|
Is putting your name in the search box (along with your search query) too much work? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Is that on the "My Messages" page? Would it really do what I want or will it also include messages that mention me?
|
|
|
|
|
Just do it from the "Search" bar in the top right there... it probably will catch things that mention your name... but will mostly do what you want...
|
|
|
|
|
Albert Holguin wrote: but will mostly do what you want...
That's not good enough.
|
|
|
|
|
PIEBALDconsult wrote: That's not good enough.
Yes princess...
Just do what thatraja suggested then. That does exactly what you want... but the search is a fast way to do it.
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
