Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[PumpelXXL]

Hi there!

The really last thing i miss in aMule back from eMule is the boolean search field features of eMule.

Back in eMule i could enter expressions like

Linux NOT ( Bill OR Gates OR Microsoft )

which would find all files maching Linux but exclude those which contain either of the latter unwanted patterns  

Or am i wrong and just failed on it  ? (Or should i RTFM's ?)


This leads to the question why the aMule team does not team up with the eMule folks, to merge the whole stuff ?

Lots of duplicated effords could be sorted out and avoided. Ok i don't want to spoil the fun of either development teams. Just thinking. The aMule's portability/Multiplatform is THE key missing feature of eMule isn't it ?

cee yaa

               Pumpel XXL

[Jacobo221]

I think CodeWarrior2, at #amule on irc.freenode.net said he was gong to do something like that. Join hannel and talk with him to see what exactly is he doing.
About the projects merge... you can guess what the answer is already ;-)

[codewarrior2]

I will take a look into it and see if I can handle something like that.

[reeky]

any news?
i think this would be a great feature.
will it be ready for 2.0 final?

bye

[deltaHF]

Originally posted by reeky
any news?

nope

will it be ready for 2.0 final?

for sure not ..
but good thing u posted here and refreshed the thread

cheers

[lfroen]

aMule has 'end' search - i.e. when you say "my file" it will find those who have both "my" and "file".
I want to say, that ability search according to complex expression like "aaa AND (bb OR cc)" is very non-trivial thing. And what is more importent, is that EACH search is limited by about 200 hits at the server side.
This means that client must have an ability to transform boolean expression to they minterm form i.e. sum of products; run query on each one and then join them. Not trivial task at all: parsing expression -> building BDD tree -> converting to canonic form -> reducing -> collecting minterms -> running query(es) -> joining results.

And a lot of theory behind - anyone who learned CS and/or formal math knows what I'm talking about.

I don't see this implemented in near future.

[skolnick]

Yes, I agree with lfroen. I'm implementing an ed2k client in Java, and when tried to do this for better searching, I faced the problem of creating the tree, parsing the search expression etc. Not that is that hard, but it can be very long an tedious to do (specially when you have more exciting features to add/bugs to fix)

Regards.

[lfroen]

Yes, it is that hard if you want support any kind of boolean expression. BDD tree transformation is not trivial thing at all. I hope you know what is it about, and why needed

[reeky]

mmm...
anyway i don't think it'd be hard to run the query in the standard way and THEN filter the 200 results, just not to read the useless ones.

for example:

i'm looking for something rare called -> something - aaa

it would help my visual seacrh if the many and many results of "something else - aaa" are dropped

search: something aaa NOT else

thanks
bye

[skolnick]

Again, it is not a trivial problem. There are many problems which may seem trivial to solve by a person, but that are not trivial to solve by a machine. Walk is a really nice example: For you, is the easiest of the things, you walk everyday, but just try to build a machine which can walk by itself the way you do everyday. Almost the same is here, for an elemental expression, may be easy to solve, but since support for complex expressions would also be desired, the problem turns harder to solve. Just reading a bit about language theory, and the way languages are parsed/interpreted would give you a hint on this problem's complexity.

Regards.

[Kry]

It will be implemented after 2.0.0 release, and I have it nearly finished anyway.

[reeky]

thanx  :baby:

if possible, it would be a nice feature to have

[niki]

Heu... while you're at it, don't you think it could be a good idea to make an option to choose the extension you want ? or is it in the name (eg Funny AND video NOT wmv) ?
and, if not, could you let the users select the extensions they want for each filetype ? (you know, I don't consider WMV as a "correct" video format : half of them are encrypted!)

Please ?

[lfroen]

"NOT xyz" is really useless thing for a simple reason - size of result set is server-side limited. This means that if "abc" have total 2000 hits, server will return you only 200, and they all might have xyz insisde. As a result, expression "abc NOT xyz" will produce 0 (or very few) hits, which is far from truth of cause. The only helpful would be "OR" search, where results are joined, but this is not-trivial as I already posted above.

[Xaignar]

For this to work properly, it would have to be implemented at the server-side.