On 13.06.2010, at 17:20, Erick Erickson wrote: > <<<but still is there some clean solution that doesnt mean a lot of coding > work on my end to handle dash both as a special and as a normal char.>>> > > And how would the code know? You're essentially asking for DWIM (Do What I > Mean) functionality, which I've been awaiting for many years.... > > It seems a reasonable approach would be to have your power users understand > they needed to escape hyphens. Or introduce your own syntax for negation > which would be a simple string substitution on the way through. Or..... > Because somewhere you need some external input that distinguishes between "I > mean this hyphen to be a negation, but this other one to be a literal". > > If this seems irrelevant, then I'm missing your point pretty badly. A use > case or two where this distinction is important would be helpful. Or is that > use-case <G>?
No, I was just wondering if someone by chance implemented the DWIM I want :) But I guess for now I will just escape, since we do not advertise + and - syntax anyway atm. Then again more and more people are learning how it works in google and are starting to just try it out when they are doing searches. What I might end up doing though is not escape dashes only in specific cases: foo-bar (escape) foo - bar (escape) foo -bar (not escape, aka probihit bar) This should enable power users and should rarely hit non power users. regards, Lukas Kahwe Smith m...@pooteeweet.org
