Re: any partial or rudamentary documentation of new nnselect work somewhere?

[Eric Abrahamsen <eric@ericabrahamsen.net>]

Harry Putnam <reader@newsguy.com> writes:

> You would know vastly more than I about the capabilities of any of the
> search tools available now. But I believe you are right in thinking
> they would not index code very well at all.

"Vastly" is an overstatement :) But I think we can assume it's not going
to work.

[...]

>> That sounds pretty useful. Maybe there's no need for a mixin class at
>> all; this could be a standard feature of the indexed search class. If
>> grep wasn't available on the system, you'd just get a polite note to
>> that effect.
>
>> Actually, there's already a regexp syntax: surrounding text with forward
>> slashes. Search engines that don't handle regexps could simply transform
>> "body:/(.*)/" into "grep:(.*)"...
>>
>> Hmmm...
>
> Yes, yes, and away you go... That two phase bit sounds really
> useful.  I am really sorry to be of no help at all.
>
> If you fellows have any low level scut work that needs doing, and I do
> mean `low level'... that is, no coding required.
>
> I realize that is a piss poor offer, and there probably is nothing
> like that involved... but still ... just in case .. the offer stands.

Thinking about it further, I think automatically translating regexps
into "grep:" might be going overboard, and would introduce unnecessary
complications. But providing the grep functionality itself still sounds
like a good idea.

And thanks for the offer of help! It's true there's not a whole lot to
be done at this point, just a bit of leftover functionality, then tests
and docs. What would be most useful is if someone could explain git
better to me so that the rebase process was less bewildering :(