Skip to main content.
home | support | download

Back to List Archive

Re: Future versions of swish-e

From: David Norris <dave(at)not-real.webaugur.com>
Date: Fri Jun 09 2000 - 17:43:25 GMT
Jose Manuel Ruiz wrote:
> As you know, I have made several modifications to swish-e.
> I think the package is complete to satisfy my own requirements

I agree.  This will be a major improvement.

> 2 - More data types. swish-e only searchs for words. What about
> date an numeric data?. There is no way now to extract data
> between two dates.

That might be feasible.  I don't know how useful it would be.  Searching
date could be handy.  I'm not sure how reliable that would be with the
many conflicting date-time formats.

> 3 - A perl/php module/library?

A PHP/4 module is definitely on my list.  I think that could be done as
a seperate project or code base without any problem.  My intention has
been to create a PHP module in C and a loadable set of PHP
functions/classes which provides similar functionality (where the
swish-e executable is the only option).  That way you can use the same
front-end scripts whether you have a SWISH-E binary with PHP code or the
SWISH-E PHP module written purely in C.

A PERL module would be a great addition, as well.

SWISH-E itself should be easy to link to various frontends.  I have been
messing around with GTK+ for a few days.  I am going to try to build a
simple filesystem "find" utility with SWISH-E.

> 4 - A server?

I like this idea.  But, the number of people who have permission to
install a server process are greatly limited.  A HTTPD-embedded module
(i.e. a PHP SWISH module) are really the only things which would greatly
benefit from this.  This, of course, would allow persistent connections
and maybe some sort of caching and better logging.

> 5 - A get document option with some type of word highlighting?

I think maybe this would be best left to a front-end.  Although, a good
example web-interface application/tutorial is sorely needed.  The PERL
and PHP scripts some of us have written are nice, however, they do not
provide much guidance on creating a custom interface.

> 6 - Better sorting of results. Now there is only a descending sort.

I think this is a reasonably low priority feature.  It can easily be
done in post processing.  But, it might be nice to have.

> Any comments?

More than I can remember ;-)

-- 
,David Norris
  Dave's Web - http://www.webaugur.com/dave/
  Dave's Weather - http://www.webaugur.com/dave/wx
  ICQ Universal Internet Number - 412039
  E-Mail - dave@webaugur.com
Received on Fri Jun 9 10:41:51 2000