topbanner_forum
  *

avatar image

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
  • Friday December 9, 2022, 10:27 pm
  • Proudly celebrating 15+ years online.
  • Donate now to become a lifetime supporting member of the site and get a non-expiring license key for all of our programs.
  • donate

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Cashper [ switch to compact view ]

Pages: [1] 2next
1
FileSearchy 1.22 has released.
It includes a function that some of you have asked for: sort by "relevance" (number of matches).
Change list:
- Columns of search results table are now configurable. It is possible to select which columns to show, to change width and position.
- New columns of search results table are available: number of matches, created time, last access time.

2
I like that Advanced mode retains search terms and the last used fields. However, Instant mode takes a different approach -- it remembers nothing. Even if the user moves from Instant to Advanced and then back, search terms are not remembered.

Instant mode makes a search with each letter you enter. I don't think it's reasonable to remember instant searches - they are easy to retype.
But i recognize that moving from instant to expanded and back with loosing results is counter intuitive. I will try to come up with a better solution in future.

The latest today's release 1.2 allows to jump from a match to correct position with double click.
Another important change is that content search speed is improved due to using multiple threads.
Pro version now has an ability to search contents of e-books (EPUB, FB2, MOBI).

3
High CPU usage is a bug, that is fixed in the latest version 1.11.

4
In the event of more than 100 matches in a file, I have noticed that FileSearchy indicates (in The Matches tab) "Only the first 100 matches are shown". Huh...why that limitation? What if there were 500 matches in a file? Then FileSearchy wouldn't show 400 matches in the Matches tab?

This limitation is because of slow matches highlighting. In future this will be resolved by either fast highlighting or by additional button to show all matches.

I would also like to ask about a "File/Save Parameters" and "File/Open Parameters" feature. This would function to preserve active fields for future searches. Also, it would help to avoid repetitive data entry (of multiple file type/delimiter configs) each time history is cleared. Settings and tabs are saved, so maybe parameters could be also?
Sound useful and easy to implement. I will add this soon.

5
Also, the context menu integration remains a bit buggy. I have it disabled in options but "Search with FileSearchy" always shows after a few content searches.

I've tracked down this problem. The next release will have a fix.

6
To me that is an important basic measure of relevance. The more a search term occurs in a document (especially with some Boolean operator), the more likely that it is relevant. In some applications search results are automatically ranked in such a way, and in most cases the top-ranked search results do turn out to be more relevant ones. Obviously one needs to pick the search terms strategically (I mostly know what the search terms are that are likely to return the results I'm looking for in my collection of documents).

I will probably add a column with name Matches (or Hits) that will show number of matches in each file. Then you will be able to sort by clicking the column.

Cashper, sorry if this is a stupid question, but apparently I'm not understanding what you are saying here. If FileSearchy moves on after the first match, how then does it list every match in each file? I mean, it appears that it is listing everything correctly in both the File tab and the Matches tab (even including line number).

FileSearchy moves on after the first match, but when you select a file it retrieves all matches for this one file.

Anyway, I ask because I agree with dr_andus that counting matches is important. Counting objectively quantifies the findings of the content search. IMO any type of search should attempt to find, display, and quantify findings.

I hope that adding a new column "fixes" the issue.

7
BTW is there any quick navigation between the two tabs? IIRC MultiFind could jump from Matches to an exact location in the File tab. Just wondering as that was quite a nice feature.

I will add this very soon.

Is there a way to rank search results by relevance (e.g. the number of times a search term occurs within a file)?

Not yet.
I think search by relevance and search by number of matches are different things.
Search by a number of matches is not hard to implement, but i don't see a use case that shows when it is needed.
Search by relevance is hard to implement, because i don't have trustworthy criteria to determine relevance.

@Cashper

Does a german translation already exist?

No, at the moment.

8
Hi sajman99,

I think i've implemented what you asked - filtered results for content searches.

matches.png

9
Hi sajman99,

Thanks for your comments!

Do you plan to add some type of filtered results (as you did in MultiFind)? I have to agree with the comments of dr_andus that searching many content results is too time-consuming. A filtered/outline view which displays only the searched-for text would enhance the user experience.

So there is currently no hotkey or other expedited method of navigation? This is a real limitation of FileSearchy as it's very cumbersome to click each highlighted line (in the lower pane) to navigate found text. BTW clicking on a highlighted line marker doesn't shift focus to the bottom pane as one might expect.

I was going to implement a navigation bar under a file contents that will show number of matches and "next", "previous" arrows.
But after your post i see that indeed it also makes sense to have a view that contains only matched lines (like in MultiFind).
I will implement this in near future.

I also agree with stewcam that folder exclusion should be implemented. For example, I would like to exclude FileSearchy's log file and various temp files.
Folder exclusion is in my to-do list. But not a top priority.

IMO there should be a recognition of matches and there should be a column along with found files which enumerates matches in each found file. It would also be very helpful to see a summary of matches and files found/files searched. For example, the summary "103 matches in 20 files of 35 searched" provides significantly more information than FileSearchy 1.0 provides.

Some summary is already available in status bar: "Found X objects in Y s".
I'm not able to show number of matches in all the found files because when FileSearchy finds the first match in a file is stops and moves to next file. Scanning for all matches is too excessive and will slow down the search.
As for number of searched files, this seems useful, i will consider adding it somewhere.

10
I haven't put FileSearchy in NANY 2014, because i'm going to create a paid pro version.

11
Ok, added this to my TO-DO list.

12
Hi stewcam,
What folders do you want to exclude from indexing and why?

13
Hi all,

Released v0.92 beta today with few fixes.
Any more feedback?
Do you think it is stable enough to remove "beta" label?

14
I've published new beta v 0.91.
Important changes:
1) Now it is possible to launch program without admin permissions. The program will work slower in this case - it will not use indexing, and that means that instant search by name will not be available.
2) Application skips UAC by creating a task in task scheduler.
3) Security improvement: When launching a program from FileSearchy, it is launched without elevation (and prompts UAC).

15
Nice. Thanks for posting this. I like the relevance bar. However, I miss the ability to rank the search results by relevance (the way it's possible in DocFetcher for instance). I need to search for terms in the contents of 1300 PDF files (ebooks and articles), and going through e.g. 500 results is time-consuming.

Thanks, sort by relevance seems very useful.
I've taken a look at DocFetcher, it seems that it gives a higher score based on number of matches and size of the document. Do you find the ranking in DocFetcher really useful?

16
Not bad Cashper!

Looks nice, finding files is really instant.
I would install it on 10 notebooks but there are only limited user accounts available.
So the only way atm is to create a task that runs with highest privileges but I do not
want it to popup automatically so could you please add an option to just display it's
tray icon instead of the full gui?



Thanks for your message! I am currently implementing ability to run without admin permissions and will provide a new version shortly.
I already implemented bypassing UAC prompt on accounts that have admin permissions.
You can run FileSearchy without full gui even in v0.9 using the following command line: "FileSearchy.exe -minimize".

17
Is there a possibility of mode switching the application so that it could be started in a lower performance but still user (level) account accessible state? IIRC this can be don't with an at launch runtime prompt so it wouldn't (/shouldn't) require requiring the user to deal with hotkeys or command line switches. Perhaps a quick rights test and then a dialog prompt appears if/as necessary.

It would go a long way towards making the application business network friendly.

Yes, this is possible. I will probably add this possibility in future versions. Thanks for your input!

18
I hope that most Windows users do have admin rights.
As for non-admin users, technically it is possible to bypass UAC, for example, by installing a service (permissions are needed only on install in this case).
But it will not take into account file permissions and will search through all files.

19
It needs an access to MFT and NTFS change journal in order to read and maintain list of all files.

20
Hi, all!

I would like to announce my new software: FileSearchy.
Program homepage: http://www.filesearchy.com/
Download URL: http://www.filesearc...load/filesearchy.exe

Key features:
  • Instant search by file name.
  • Search by file file contents, size and date.
  • Supports search inside PDF, Office and other documents (e.g. PDF, RTF, DOC, XLS, PPT, DOCX, XLSX, PPTX etc).
  • Highlights found text in file names and contents.
  • Clean and intuitive multi-tabbed user interface.

screenshot1.png

screenshot2.png

Please let me know what do you think of it.
This is a first release and a beta, so might have a lot of bugs. Please let me know of them.

21
BTW, speaking about $$, is there any discount for DC members (sorry if I missed the announcement somewhere) ?
No, currently no discount is available.

About the way searches are specified :

Is there an easy way to look for files that have say 'alpha' and 'beta' in their name.  I would like to locate files having names such as
alpha-20-beta.doc
betaplusalpha.txt
beta.alpha

etc.

Yes, there is. Enter "alpha;beta" in the "File name" field.

22
Hi sajman99,
MultiFind (free version) is not dropped and is updated from time to time, but some features are only present in MultiFind Pro. You can find link to MultiFind on midlinesoft.com, just go to home (root) page.

23
I'm grad to announce that portable version of MultiFind Pro has just been released. It is available on the MultiFind Pro homepage.
Please let me know if you like it.

24
Great - and please could we have a Favourite Path drop-down as well as path Browse?  Thanks...

I hope that my previous post answered your question. If no, please describe what do you mean by "Favourite Path drop-down as well as path Browse".

25
I already started to implement drop-down history list feature.
Here are the screenshots:

[attachimg=#1][/attachimg]

[attachimg=#2][/attachimg]

Another new feature under development is an ability to select multiple folders and to select folders that should not be searched.

[attachimg=#3][/attachimg]

[attachimg=#4][/attachimg]

Pages: [1] 2next