At 04:04 10/11/00 +0100, you wrote: >Peter Donald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> I missed the reason why multiple patterns were removed - can someone >> enlighten me ? ;) > >I can't remeber the had been removed. Could be side effect of the >changes I have made to DirectoryScanner to speed it up (by not >scanning excluded directories). If so, it is an accident.
Okay - I will have a look ;) >> I use to use them all the time for constructs like >> "com/biz/*/**". Now I tried to get around this by using an include >> of "com/biz/**" and an exclude of "com/biz/*" but that doesn't seem >> to work either. > >The later one should work and I don't see any reason why your old >construct wouldn't work either (you know that "doesn't work" is not >the most specific form of a bug report ;-) well by doesn't work I meant produced no results or matched nothing :0 Cheers, Pete *------------------------------------------------------* | "Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want | | to test a man's character, give him power." | | -Abraham Lincoln | *------------------------------------------------------*
