Shawn K. Hall wrote:
> 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.
They already do. The order the searches are loaded (alphabetically, I imagine) would determine what order they were parsed, whereas now they go in the order specified in the 'detect special commands' portion of the def() method.
Oh, right, I meant override on autodetect pattern. If I build a search, and add an autodetect hook that looks for NN > NN, it will interfere with and/or hide curr.xml. I don't think it's much of a problem, though.
> 1) ignore the error and just skip adding the alias to the stack if > the search does not exist (preferred). > > #1 is far easier to implement, and requires less user interaction.
Yep, that's what I would prefer as well.
> > ...do you want to get your hands dirty, or should I? > > > I'd love to, but time is still not as free for me as I'd like it to > be. When I've got a little more time available I'd be happy to post > the necessary changes.
Great, I have some other stuff to look into.
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
