Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [Clip] Searching for multiple text items

Expand Messages
  • Sheri
    ... Hi Alec (Flo), I think Flo was hoping for an easy, free solution to boolean searches that could be launched from clips. Bfind takes compound boolean
    Message 1 of 26 , Jun 1, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In ntb-clips@yahoogroups.com, Alec Burgess <buralex@...> wrote:
      >
      >
      > Sheri (silvermoonwoman@...) wrote (in part) (on 2009-06-01 at
      > 18:11):
      > > The bfind text file states: "As with most DOS-based utilities,
      > > this program doesn't understand the weird subdirectories, long
      > > filenames, invalid characters that are possible under Windows."
      >
      > Flo/Sheri - I haven't followed this in detail and had never heard
      > of bfind before but are either of you familiar with Unix based
      > text processing commands available via UnxUtils (smaller download
      > and less extraneous programs) or Cygwin? By putting their
      > programs in your $PATH environment that can be used (I think)
      > co-equal with "standard" DOS commands.

      Hi Alec (Flo),

      I think Flo was hoping for an easy, free solution to boolean searches that could be launched from clips. Bfind takes compound boolean expressions. Too bad Mr. Guthrie never updated beyond VBasic Compiler for DOS 1.0. His documentation was written using PE2 (which prompted my recent poorly received nostalgia... :D)

      But anyway. If you come across a better command line tool that works well on Windows, let us know.

      > For AND logic I'd be looking at generating a list of files
      > containing 1st word with a grep command, piping that into a
      > second grep command looking for 2nd word , ... , rinse, lather
      > and repeat till Nth word.

      Exactly what the recently posted clip-to-bat-to-^$GetOutput$ (using Findstr) did. I may refine that a bit.
      >
      > For OR logic - running a grep for each word generating N
      > file-lists, concatenating them together eliminating duplicates.

      Findstr handles "Or" directly. A list of search words is automatically or'ed. Findstr also does regular expressions, which one would think could alternate or's.

      Actually Bfind is also good addition to the toolbox once you get a handle on its limitations. Flo, Bfind was a "good find" :D

      Regards,
      Sheri
    • Flo
      ... Yes, Sheri, that s my point. To be launched from a clip and returning the search results to NT. Or more detailed: 1. Start a clip in NT 2. Use hard-coded
      Message 2 of 26 , Jun 2, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In ntb-clips@yahoogroups.com, "Sheri" <silvermoonwoman@...> wrote:
        >
        >
        > Hi Alec (Flo),
        >
        > I think Flo was hoping for an easy, free solution to boolean
        > searches that could be launched from clips...

        > I think Flo was hoping for an easy, free solution to boolean
        > searches that could be launched from clips.

        Yes, Sheri, that's my point. To be launched from a clip and returning the search results to NT. Or more detailed:

        1. Start a clip in NT
        2. Use hard-coded search criteria or enter them in a wizard
        3. Send these criteria as parameters to an external tool
        4. Return the search results to NT, i.e. insert the results into a document or continue clip execution with these results.

        I agree with you that BFIND is not the standard we need though it masters Boolean Expressions. (By the way: We may improve that whole-words issue a little bit by adding spaces and writing "·Babcock·" (quoted) but again this wouldn't cover all variations.)

        Maybe the best solution would be an utility that combines something like BFIND (Boolean expressions) with FINDSTR (RegEx), or another tool that we havn't seen so far.

        Those work-arounds with GREP or FINDSTR are able to simulate a Boolean AND, OR, and probably also a NOT. But -- as I said before -- we'll get into trouble when trying to create a solution executing enlarged Boolean queries like Chilli's example "(apples AND oranges) OR (apples AND bananas)".

        There are tools perfectly executing such Boolean queries -- I mentioned InfoRapid (http://www.inforapid.de/html/searchreplace.htm), for example. Another nice little tool is WanyWord (http://home4.inet.tele.dk/jensguld/). But the problem with these programs is how to fully integrate them in a clip as mentioned above.

        So I agree with Sheri's summary: "But anyway. If you come across a better command line tool that works well on Windows, let us know."

        Or we may see an improved Search Disk Command in the future. i.e.: a Search Disk that executes Boolean search and comes with commands for scripting. I wonder why Eric Fookes shows that "fair amount of reserve" with respect to these issues though the drawbacks of Search Disk have often been discussed in this forum...

        Regards,
        Flo
      • Sheri
        Hi Flo, FWIW, More on Findstr: Its regex features are quite limited, e.g., vertical bar, plus sign and question mark have no special meaning. Findstr search
        Message 3 of 26 , Jun 4, 2009
        • 0 Attachment
          Hi Flo,

          FWIW, More on Findstr:

          Its regex features are quite limited, e.g., vertical bar, plus sign and question mark have no special meaning.

          Findstr search strings can be stored in a file read with /G: parameter (one string per line, where lines are "or'ed"). If read from a file, ansi characters with high decimal values lik "ß" work fine. But if such characters are included on the command line, e.g., in ^$GetOutPut$, they won't work.

          Regards,
          Sheri






          terms submitted on the command line contain such characters, they don't work.

          --- In ntb-clips@yahoogroups.com, "Flo" <flo.gehrke@...> wrote:
          >
          > --- In ntb-clips@yahoogroups.com, "Sheri" <silvermoonwoman@> wrote:
          > >
          > >
          > > Hi Alec (Flo),
          > >
          > > I think Flo was hoping for an easy, free solution to boolean
          > > searches that could be launched from clips...
          >
          > > I think Flo was hoping for an easy, free solution to boolean
          > > searches that could be launched from clips.
          >
          > Yes, Sheri, that's my point. To be launched from a clip and returning the search results to NT. Or more detailed:
          >
          > 1. Start a clip in NT
          > 2. Use hard-coded search criteria or enter them in a wizard
          > 3. Send these criteria as parameters to an external tool
          > 4. Return the search results to NT, i.e. insert the results into a document or continue clip execution with these results.
          >
          > I agree with you that BFIND is not the standard we need though it masters Boolean Expressions. (By the way: We may improve that whole-words issue a little bit by adding spaces and writing "·Babcock·" (quoted) but again this wouldn't cover all variations.)
          >
          > Maybe the best solution would be an utility that combines something like BFIND (Boolean expressions) with FINDSTR (RegEx), or another tool that we havn't seen so far.
          >
          > Those work-arounds with GREP or FINDSTR are able to simulate a Boolean AND, OR, and probably also a NOT. But -- as I said before -- we'll get into trouble when trying to create a solution executing enlarged Boolean queries like Chilli's example "(apples AND oranges) OR (apples AND bananas)".
          >
          > There are tools perfectly executing such Boolean queries -- I mentioned InfoRapid (http://www.inforapid.de/html/searchreplace.htm), for example. Another nice little tool is WanyWord (http://home4.inet.tele.dk/jensguld/). But the problem with these programs is how to fully integrate them in a clip as mentioned above.
          >
          > So I agree with Sheri's summary: "But anyway. If you come across a better command line tool that works well on Windows, let us know."
          >
          > Or we may see an improved Search Disk Command in the future. i.e.: a Search Disk that executes Boolean search and comes with commands for scripting. I wonder why Eric Fookes shows that "fair amount of reserve" with respect to these issues though the drawbacks of Search Disk have often been discussed in this forum...
          >
          > Regards,
          > Flo
          >
        • Flo
          ... Thanks for these hints, Sheri! I ve tested some ß . When stored in a file, it works fine. Flo
          Message 4 of 26 , Jun 4, 2009
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In ntb-clips@yahoogroups.com, "Sheri" <silvermoonwoman@...> wrote:
            >
            > Hi Flo,
            >
            > FWIW, More on Findstr:
            >
            > Its regex features are quite limited, e.g., vertical bar, plus sign and question mark have no special meaning.
            >
            > Findstr search strings can be stored in a file read with /G: parameter (one string per line, where lines are "or'ed"). If read from a file, ansi characters with high decimal values lik "ß" work fine. But if such characters are included on the command line, e.g., in ^$GetOutPut$, they won't work.
            >
            > Regards,
            > Sheri

            Thanks for these hints, Sheri! I've tested some "ß". When stored in a file, it works fine.

            Flo
          • chilli_palmer@sbcglobal.net
            ... version 3 was released, so it hasn t really been raised by half overnight. ... The FREE PRGrep worked perfectly well. Once it identified the text files
            Message 5 of 26 , Jun 7, 2009
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In ntb-clips@yahoogroups.com, Jane Sedgewick <jane_sedgewick@...>
              wrote:
              >
              > Actually, Powergrep has been $149 since at least 2005 around the time
              version 3 was released, so it hasn't really been raised by half
              overnight.
              >
              >
              >
              > Jane

              The FREE PRGrep worked perfectly well. Once it identified the text
              files with the information, opening and finishing up with Notetab was
              just great.

              The best thing out of this whole experience is being referred to these
              groups by Fookes support email, and you guys letting me know to upgrade
              from 4.95 to 6.1 which I love.

              Thanks again!



              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.