|
If this program is to be used by
Pastors and Sunday school teachers etc... I think they will mostly fall into the
category of the uninitiated to regex. Including myself.
> The REAL reason to keep it is because of geek appeal. What kind
of free
> software project would we be if we didn't support regex? :) And a loud cheer goes up for Joel from the
users gallery :-)
On Sat, 07 Sep 2002 22:42:37 -0700 Joel Mawhorter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
writes:
> > I will be working on is adding a new type of search to Sword. I have used just about all of these searches
mentioned in OLB and have found these searches very useful. You can
also search for "All verses containing two or more of
God" by inputting "god ... god" Though I can't remember a time when
had a use for such a search. But I could site numerouse times I have used the
search methods below. That's one reason I still keep OLB loaded.
> The new search type will be based on typical boolean search
> operations (AND, OR, NOT,and maybe XOR using the operators &, |, !, and ^ > respectively). Grouping with parenthases will be supported. For example, (God & > (Father | Son | Spirit)) will give you all of the verses that have the word > "God" and at least one of the words "Father", "Son" and "Spirit". Both word > and phrase search terms will be supported within the same search expression. > For example, (Jesus & "son of God") will find all verses with both the > word and the phrase in them. I will also be adding a specialized AND operator > that considers verse proximity. For example, ("lamb of God", Jesus, "take > away", sins @3) will find all combinations of verses within 3 of each other > that have all the search terms in them. This could be one verse that has > all the search terms or any set of n verses (where n <= the number of search > terms), each with one or more of the search terms, such that the two verses > in the set that are fartest apart do not have more than two verses in > between. I will also allow simple wildcards. I'm not sure how simple or complex > that will be yet but at a minimum will allow something like (Jesus & > lov*) which will find love, loving, etc. All of the above functions will be > useable within one search expression. For example: > ((one*,"a phrase",two@2) ^ (three & !(four | five)). I'm not certain > anyone would ever need a search expression of that complexity but it just > gives an example of what will be possible. I intend this search functionality > to be practical superset of the existing search types. It won't be exactly > a superset since it won't have full regular expression support. > However, I think that with the functionality available, regular expressions > won't be necessary. If any of you can think of an example of something that > you do with the current regular expression searching that won't be possible > with what I described above, please let me know. > > The second area that I will be working on is adding indexed > searching where searching can be done on a precomputed index of search terms rather > than the current mechanism where the whole Bible has to be read in from disk > and searched in a brute force manner. This should decrease the search > time to a very small fraction of what it currently is. One downside of indexed > searching is that full regular expression searching isn't very > feasible. I'll leave it as an exercise for the reader to verify that searching for > /a.*b/ would be neither be very easy to implement nor very fast using an > index (grin). > > > In Christ, > > Joel Mawhorter > > > > |
