Hi Shawn, > Personally, I think we ought to provide a mechanism for > searches to 'announce' their need to provide an autodetect > mechanism. > [...]
Looks like a good idea. The only counter-argument I can think of (and I'm only posing it for the sake of it) is that searches are free to override others. But it's no big deal, and I would guess the amount of 'malicious' searches approaches zero rather than anything else. > > As for aliases, the ".", "+" and the "#" bite me every time with > > ".NET", "C++" and "C#" - I'd love to get rid of those. > > +1 > > I *hate* those particular default aliases. I hear you. I'm thinking about dropping them, and make the installation create a backupaliases.txt before overwriting the original, and then present a "if you want to keep the stupid standard aliases, please copy&paste [...]" message. > I also think the > aliasing tool should NOT raise errors if the search is not > loadable - the engine is capable of determining if the search > really exists, so just test it before adding it to the stack. > This would alleviate the 'backwards compatibility' problem. I'm not sure I follow... Sounds like a good idea overall, in that referenced searches that don't exist won't be added to the alias collection, but I don't see how it helps with backward compat? Anyway, those are both brilliant ideas - do you want to get your hands dirty, or should I? Cheers, Kim ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: GNOME Foundation Hackers Unite! GUADEC: The world's #1 Open Source Desktop Event. GNOME Users and Developers European Conference, 28-30th June in Norway http://2004/guadec.org _______________________________________________ DQSD-Devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dqsd-devel
