Vimperator uses strictly numeric hints by default. This has several disadvantages:
Smaller scope: it only takes 10 links to get to double digits
Number keys are harder to type
Is there any way to make Vimperator use more characters (ideally [a-zA-Z0-9])?
There is an option called hintchars, that changes the characters that are used for hints.
You have put the following line in your .vimperatorrc, of course with exactly the characters on the right hand side that you want to use:
set hintchars=asdfghklqwertyuiop
To add to answer above. If you type set hintchars= you'll get a nice list of recommendations
You can set the values to pretty much any keys though just remember that the order matters and the hints will start in that order so Smart Order is pretty awesome.
If you prefer more characters you can make it case sensitive by setting it to:
hjklHJKL... so first 8 links will always be at your fingertips !
Related
One thing that constantly annoys me about VS is that when I do a Find or Find all, it looks in comments, strings, and other places. When I'm trying to find a particular bit of code, like and rent, it finds it all over. Is there a way to limit searches just to code?
Not sure if there is a specific setting to ignore comments, but you could do a regex find. For example, assuming you want to find "text", you could use this:
^(?!\s*?//).*?text
Caveats:
Assumes comments start with // as first non-whitespace characters. E.g. C# comment types
Doesn't work for comments at the end of code lines (only comments on their own lines)
Doesn't work with block comments, for example /* comment */
So overall it isn't perfect by any means, but depending how many hits you are getting, it might help to cut them down which can be useful if you have a lot of false positives in one-liner comments
The 'Find All References' function may suit you : it ignores all commented-out code and text in strings. CTRL+K, R is the keyboard shortcut.
(Note that it's designed for going from a specific instance of a search string to all other instances. so if you haven't already found an instance of what you're searching for, you would have to (temporarily) type one in to the editor window, then search. Also it's not available for all languages : I know it works fine for C#, though.)
We are confronting different search engines for our research
archives and having browsed the Xapian-Omega documentation, we
decided to try it out since the Omega option appears to be an
appropriate solution with several interesting search options.
We installed Xapian-Omega on a Linux Server (Deb 7) and tested
the setup with success. However we are unsure as to how one can
employ or perhaps even enable the use of Wild Cards or Regular
Expressions with Xapian-Omega.
We read that for Xapian one has to enable the Wild Card option
"QueryParser flags"
Could someone clarify this ?
ie. explain with or indicate a page with an example or two.
But we did not see much information regarding examples with Omega
CGI and although this latter runs well, wild card options
(such as * for the general wild card and ? as a single character),
do not seem to work as expected by default and they would be
useful, even though stemming and substrings etc may be functional.
Eg: It would be interesting to be able to employ standard simple
wild char searches with a certain precision such as :
medic* for medicine medical medicament
or with ? for single characters
Can Regexp be recognised with Omega ?
eg : sep[ae]r[ae]te(\w+)?
or searching for structured formats such as Email or Credit Card
Numbers or certain formula types in research papers etc.
In a note from Olly Betts long ago (Dev Mailing List) regarding
this one suggestion was to grep the index file but this would
defeat the RAD advantage of Omega.
Any examples of searches using Omega with Wild Cards or Regular
Expressions would be most appreciated ... even an indication of
a page where information regarding this theme is well presented
with examples illustrating how to develop advanced searches
using Xapian alone would be most welcome (PHP or Python perhaps).
(We are not concerned for the moment about the eventual
substantial increase in the size of the index size or in the
time to index the archive)
You can enable right-wildcards (such as "medic*") in Omega using $set{flag_wildcard,1} (covered in the Omegascript documentation), which enables FLAG_WILDCARD. There's a section in the user manual on using wildcards.
Xapian doesn't provide support for regular expression searching, although in theory I believe it would be possible to support, if potentially costly (depending on the regex). It would have to run the regular expression against unstemmed terms in the database, and then feed them into the search. Where it becomes difficult is if the regex expands to a lot of terms (eg just 'a' as a regex). There's also some subtlety in making it efficient; it's easy to jump through the term list to something with a constant prefix, and you'd want to take advantage of that if possible.
For your example of sep[ae]r[ae]te(\w+)?, it sounds like you actually want a combination of spelling correction (for the a-e substitutions, which you can enable using $set{flag_spelling_correction,1}) and stemming (for the trailing letters after 'te'; Omega defaults to English stemming, but that can be changed), or either wildcard or partial match support.
If you do need regular expressions for your use case, then I'd suggest bringing it up on the xapian-discuss mailing list. Xapian has moved on since the last discussion, and I believe it would be easier to build such support now than it was then.
James Ayatt: Thank you for your answer and help, my apologies for this belated reply, a distraction with other work.
We had already seen the Omegascript page but it was not clear to us how to employ these options with the CGI interface. Also the use of * seems to be for trailing chars, is that correct ? ie not for internal groups of words eg: omeg*ipt; there are cases where the stemming option would not be sufficient. We did not see an option for single wild chars, sometimes represented by ? in certain search engines. Could you comment here ?
Regarding the use of regular expressions we had immagined that it might not be quite as simple as one could hope. The examples mentioned in the preceding post were of course simple possible uses, there are of course many more. Your comment on using the stemming option seems appropriate.
In certain cases it could be interesting to enable some type of regexp option for the extraction of text forms, such as those mentioned. The quick extractiion of such text, perhaps together with some surrounding text could be very useful.
We will certainly try your proposal with the mailing list.
Thank you again.
I have very recently answered to the question about Creating TreeView with nodes and checkboxes.
While I was pondering how to properly process the case when treeview's node is checked when user pressing spacebar I ran into TVN_KEYDOWN notification.
My solution was tested in a dialog box and in a window procedure and both seem to work flawlessly.
Still, I have a dilemma of what should be my returned result. Here is the relevant excerpt from the documentation for TVN_KEYDOWN:
Return value
If the wVKey member of lParam is a character key code, the character
will be used as part of an incremental search. Return nonzero to
exclude the character from the incremental search, or zero to include
the character in the search. For all other keys, the return value is
ignored.
I have tried returning both results when testing if spacebar is pressed and haven't noticed any difference.
So I ask you the following questions:
Can someone explain me what is the incremental search ?
What is the difference when I include or exclude the tested character (spacebar) from incremental search ?
EDIT:
It seems that I have found an answer to first question. I have found an article on Wikipedia that explains what incremental search is.
It leaves only the second question to be answered.
END OF EDIT
Thank you.
Best regards.
It is most visible in a giant TreeView. The best example of one is the left panel in Regedit.exe. Expand HKCR and start typing to see the effect.
The implementation has changed across Windows versions, it used to be a lot less usable in XP. It is a UI blooper, there isn't any good way for the user to see that he mistyped a letter, to correct a typing mistake or to see that a search starts from scratch. Current versions of Windows use a timeout, automatically resetting the partially typed search phrase when you don't hit a key for a couple of seconds. Which is about as practical as it gets. It is certainly useful, just not very usable.
The only sane thing to do with TVN_KEYDOWN is nothing. Never add more ways to make it less predictable than it already is. Intentionally swallowing a keystroke of course makes it a lot less usable if it is a key the user really wanted to use. You certainly don't want to swallow a space, that's of course a valid character in tree node text. If the tree happens to not have any nodes with text that contains a space then you still don't want to swallow it, the control itself already does.
The notification would have been a lot more useful if it also passed the incremental search string that was collected or give a way to reset it. It just doesn't so that's water under the bridge. Consider handling it if you've created some kind of usability trap, very hard to come up with a practical example of one. You know it when you see it.
The only real use is to completely replace the search function. You'd then make your own rules and select a node yourself. And of course always return a non-zero value.
You want only answer to the second question, so this is:
If you exclude spacebar from incremental search, you dont find trewview item with spacebar.
Note: You must disable TVS_CHECKBOXES style, because treeview wndproc handle spacebar different with this style set.
I'm working on a Web application that uses tags like Stackoverflow tags. I've noticed that a lot of sites that use tags make them space-delimited, which disallows a tags like...
"favorite recipes"
Instead they enforce this...
"favorite-recipes" | "favorite_recipes" | "FavoriteRecipes"
If the tags were comma-delimited, an item could have a set of tags like...
"cats, birds, favorite recipes, horses"
I have to decide on the policy for my app.
I guess I like the idea of space-delimited, but if my users aren't programmers they might be more comfortable with the familiar idea of commas denoting a list.
Why are comma-delimited tags unusual? Is there a major downside to them?
I think space delimited tags feel more like typing and you aren't syntactically bound to commas or pipes etc...
I also think that not allowing spaces in tags is kind of nice because you don't have to worry about turning them into URLs they are already ready to go.
Online tools like Delicious use space delimiting for tags, but other tools like Wordpress allow you to have spaces in tags so they require commas. If you do things this way, you will have to create similar tag "slugs" to make sure they work in a URL cleanly (i.e. my tag would be my-tag)
Remember, allowing too much freedom in your tag creation can result in some pretty crazy tags like "Things I like to do on a Saturday afternoon..." etc.
I think the idea is that a tag should be short and to the point.
If you go to type in "favorite recipes", when it doesn't work, you think to yourself "Oh, I should redo this." So you make "favorites" "recipes" instead.
If it was something you really needed, like "pork roast" then it makes sense to make it "pork-roast" but only after you've thought about really joining those works. Perhaps you shouldn't though - perhaps it should be "pork" "roast" so it shows up under searches for pork and searches for roast.
tl;dr It's for user experience and searching so they don't enter something that can't be easily searched for.
Yes, I also think that space-separated tags reduce complexity. And you can enter them faster, because you have the big space key to separate them. Maybe the brain is also less loaded, because it doesn't need to think about where to put a comma delimiter and where not.
I built an app with tags once, and used commas. The only down side to commas is that you have to do more thorough checking of empty tags. For instance in the example:
"George Bush, Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, "
If someone posts the tags with a comma at the end and there is a space it generally will get added to the database.
This is because if you simply check to delete once space you would turn Bill Clinton into BillClinton.
However you can make sure that the tag is at least a certain amount of characters to ensure there is not empty tags. This will not ensure that there is not three or four spaces in a row though.
Anther thing to note is that humans generally put spaces before words and after commas.
So in the example above there is a space after each comma and before each president. This space will be included in the database making the tag:
" Bill Clinton"
instead of
"Bill Clinton"
as the user probably attempted.
Once again you can eliminate both beginning and trailing spaces, but there is more server side code to implement in this case.
If you just use spaces then you can eliminate any unwanted characters like commas etc, and put the tags into an array using space characters to separate them.
I actually prefer tags that are comma or semi-colon delimited for two basic reasons:
It's more natural (user-centric not techie-centric)
It reduces redundancy, as the example noted "favorite-recipes"
"favorite_recipes" "FavoriteRecipes"
And I'm afraid some of the other answers sort of make it sound as if web developers are (how shall I say this) less willing to do the work than, for instance, database developers - who've been addressing some of these same issues for years. (I've coded for web and client-server databases.)
I'm looking for an algorithm that sorts strings similar to the way files (and folders) are sorted in Windows Explorer. It seems that numeric values in strings are taken into account when sorted which results in something like
name 1, name 2, name 10
instead of
name 1, name 10, name 2
which you get with a regular string comparison.
I was about to start writing this myself but wanted to check if anyone had done this before and was willing to share some code or insights. The way I would approach this would be to add leading zeros to the numeric values in the name before comparing them. This would result in something like
name 00001, name 00010, name 00002
which when sorted with a regular string sort would give me the correct result.
Any ideas?
It's called "natural sort order". Jeff had a pretty extensive blog entry on it a while ago, which describes the difficulties you might overlook and has links to several implementations.
Explorer uses the API StrCmpLogicalW() for this kind of sorting (called 'natural sort order').
You don't need to write your own comparison function, just use the one that already exists.
A good explanation can be found here.
There is StrCmpLogicalW, but it's only available starting with Windows XP and only implemented as Unicode.
Some background information:
http://www.siao2.com/2006/10/01/778990.aspx
The way I understood it, Windows Explorer sorts as per your second example - it's always irritated me hugely that the ordering comes out 1, 10, 2. That's why most apps which write lots of files (like batch apps) always use fixed length filenames with leading 0's or whatever.
Your solution should work, but you'd need to be careful where the numbers were in the filename, and probably only use your approach if they were at the very end.
Have a look at
http://www.interact-sw.co.uk/iangblog/2007/12/13/natural-sorting
for some source code.
I also posted a related question with additional hints and pitfalls:
Sorting strings is much harder than you thought
I posted code (C#) and a description of the algorithm here:
Natural Sort Order in C#
This is a try to implement it in Java:
Java - Sort Strings like Windows Explorer
In short it splits the two Strings to compare in Letter - Digit Parts and compares this parts in a specific way to achieve this kind of sorting.