|
 |
Warp wrote:
> Do you honestly think I would be claiming that it doesn't work if I hadn't
> tried it already? It doesn't work.
You talked about XP. I'm talking about Vista, where it works far better. I
used Agent Ransack all the time on XP. Now I just use Vista search, unless
I'm specifically searching somewhere non-indexed (like inside the System32
directory) or I'm looking for a regex.
>> If all you want to do is search for a
>> regular expression in a directory tree, it's trivial to add that to Windows
>> either with a GUI or without.
>
> You have a really odd definition of "trivial".
>
> My definition of "trivial" is if it would be something like "write 'xyz'
> here, and it will work".
>
> Apparently your definition of "trivial" is "not impossible".
My definition of trivial is "download this .exe and put it in your search
path." Try google for "win32 grep" and you get several hits, one of which is
a direct GNU port.
>> If you want to know how to do searches that
>> are difficult in Linux, then it's going to be complex in Windows too.
>
> "grep 'xyz.hh' *" isn't very difficult in Linux. It seems to be in Windows
> (at least when using Windows Explorer).
XP, or Vista? As I said, it's broken in XP. I know that. That's why I'm
pointing you to win32 grep and at Agent Ransack. I'm offering you my
experience as a programmer on Windows having met and overcome the same
frustrations. If you really just want to bitch that there are some things
easy in Linux that are hard in Windows, then fine.
>> I'm
>> not going to teach you how to do that any more than you're going to explain
>> how to write the same searches using Linux tools.
>
> Do you know why? Because it's *not* trivial in Windows.
The thing I refused to explain (such as finding text in document comments
but not document content) isn't trivial in Linux, either.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Linux: Now bringing the quality and usability of
open source desktop apps to your personal electronics.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
