On 18 December 2015 at 21:57, Henner Zeller <h.zel...@acm.org> wrote: > On 18 December 2015 at 21:50, Chris Pavlina <pavlina.ch...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 09:40:29PM -0800, Henner Zeller wrote: >>> On 18 December 2015 at 21:33, Chris Pavlina <pavlina.ch...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > I'm not going to argue about search methods, it'll suffice to say I >>> > disagree. I don't _want_ to search my library your way, and yes, I >>> > understand that it can work. >>> > >>> > I'm unconvinced that adding one option box is excessive complexity. It's >>> > not in the main UI, it's in the preferences dialog. What's wrong with >>> > preferences? Users can ignore those. Most do. Though the preferences >>> > dialog does need to be reorganized. >>> >>> The problem is, that people don't find it. They get frustrated because >>> they want to search with regular expressions, but it doesn't work. And >>> they never find the option to set it. >> >> Somehow I don't think that wildcard/regex search is going to be a big >> advertised feature that all the kids will be flocking to kicad for. I >> also doubt that the sort of person who would want it is the sort of >> person who couldn't be bothered to look at the options. >> >>> >>> If the dialog would do all matches in parallel and increases scores >>> for each matcher that triggers, then you get all the simple matching I >>> am proposing and all the extended regular expression searching that >>> you want. And it will work automatically without anyone ever setting >>> an option. >> >> Yes, and clutters up the results with false matches, just like searching >> for "ATXMEGA*D3" by typing "ATXMEGA D3" does. > > But if you have all scoring functions engaged, the relevant come first. > >> >> Seriously, what is it with this mailing list? Every time someone >> suggests a simple idea, everyone immediately piles on with their >> favorite way to overcomplicate it. > > Calm down. I make suggestions to _simplify_, not complicate. > >> >> I just suggested adding this because I thought it'd be a simple addition >> that might add some utility for some people. Never imagined wildcards >> could be so controversial. > > As I said, I like wildcards and regexp and like to see them supported. > But I suggested way to support them automatically. > >>Take it or leave it, I'm not going to keep >> revising it to make it more complex. > > You don't have to. I can do that.
Attached, the simplified patch, using your new matchers: * Uses all your matchers, but does not need to have the factory. * No need for extra code to add option for users. * Same effect. People can use any syntax they want and get matches accordingly. * It is very unlikely to get unwanted results. * Less code (366 vs 833 loc) * More user friendly to use (no search for obscure options, if someone uses FOO*BAR or a regexp it just works as expected). -h > >> >>> >>> -h >>> >>> > >>> > >>> > On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 09:19:54PM -0800, Henner Zeller wrote: >>> >> On 18 December 2015 at 20:16, Chris Pavlina <pavlina.ch...@gmail.com> >>> >> wrote: >>> >> > As discussed earlier today, this patch adds support for both wildcard >>> >> > and regular expression search to the eeschema component chooser. An >>> >> > option is added to eeschema options to select the "Component search >>> >> > method", which defaults to "Simple" (the original behavior). Regular >>> >> > expression search was added as a "bonus", as it was used as a stepping >>> >> > stone to wildcard search. >>> >> >>> >> Cool, I'll try it. >>> >> >>> >> BUT: I am skeptical I must admit, as adding these features that are >>> >> undoublty more complicated for the non-software engineer to use and >>> >> also to choose from. More choices for the user to handle, and I am not >>> >> convinced yet that it is worth it. >>> >> >>> >> I would rather try to make the search as best as possible that a few >>> >> words will bring the result. If it doesn't, then the scoring function >>> >> needs to be tweaked. I am a big fan of simple user interfaces... >>> >> >>> >> Do you have some real world examples that are really hard to solve >>> >> with simple string-matching and scoring of the result as it is now >>> >> (the XMEGA example in the other thread can be done by just having a >>> >> space between the xmega and d3, so this is not really a good example). >>> >> >>> >> Having simple user interfaces is hugely important IMHO, so we should >>> >> add features and confusing user options only if the simple way of >>> >> dealing with it can't do it. >>> >> >>> >> -h >>> >> >>> >> > >>> >> > The existing behavior of Henner's component chooser wasn't changed, >>> >> > just >>> >> > the matching function it uses. >>> >> > >>> >> > Following Wayne's suggestion, an EDA_PATTERN_MATCH base class is >>> >> > defined >>> >> > in include/eda_pattern_match.h, and then: >>> >> > >>> >> > - EDA_PATTERN_MATCH_SUBSTR implements EDA_PATTERN_MATCH with the old >>> >> > behavior >>> >> > >>> >> > - EDA_PATTERN_MATCH_REGEX implements EDA_PATTERN_MATCH providing regex >>> >> > search via wxRegEx and wxRE_ADVANCED. >>> >> > >>> >> > - EDA_PATTERN_MATCH_WILDCARD extends EDA_PATTERN_MATCH_REGEX, >>> >> > translating a wildcard string to a regular expression and then >>> >> > loading >>> >> > it into the latter. This allows the nice, fast, wxString-compatible, >>> >> > and well tested regex search to be reused for wildcard search. >>> >> > >>> >> > -- >>> >> > Chris >>> >> > >>> >> > _______________________________________________ >>> >> > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers >>> >> > Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net >>> >> > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers >>> >> > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp >>> >> >
regexp-and-wildcard-match.patch.gz
Description: GNU Zip compressed data
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp