| Re: boolean search foxtrot pro bug. 5.0 build 1267 [message #227 is a reply to message #224] |
Mon, 25 August 2014 20:04   |
FoxTrot Engineering
Messages: 417
Registered: April 2020
|
Senior Member |
|
|
rwstahlhut«~at~»gmail«|dot|»com wrote:
> I hope you fill this gap in function. If
> you do, please consider adding "NOT" also, which is the other standard
> search operator.
You can already exclude documents containing certains words, or groups of consecutive words, using the "-" operator in the search pattern, or by using the [does not include any of the words] criterion.
Are there some other things for which a true NOT operator would be useful?
Would it be sufficient for you if we add an [all criteria] / [at least one criterion] switch, when using multiple criteria (or the equivalent in the search pattern syntax, like [matches the search pattern] [ (somm nicotine) | (somm BPA) | (wild byrne putative) ] ? Or is there some real cases where you actually need multiple level of parenthesis?
Jérôme - CTM Engineering
------------------------------------------------------------ ---------
"Foxtrot Professional Search is a fantastic application. I simply
couldn't live without it."
FoxTrot Professional Search user comment
Download a demo version from www.foxtrot.ch
------------------------------------------------------------ ---------
Jérôme - FoxTrot Engineering
|
|
|
|
] 
FoxTrot Search Forum
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
