My vote is "no", or more specifically "not yet". After seeing how much work is involved in unicode, I think we're stretched thin enough just trying to make a good Roman alphabet search engine.
I agree.
When 3.2.0b5 was released, there were lots of comments from 3.1.6 users that the digging speed is unacceptable. I vote that the next major project should be to improve the efficiency, in terms of speed, database size and (if possible) code size. Neal, you mentioned big improvements using STL. Do you have any sample code?
I am fascinated by migrating the whole code to the use of the standard library features, particularly strings, streams and overall containers (and related iterators and eventually algorithms).
However I'd put it in a feature list of an hypothetical 3.3 or even 4 release together with other things (maybe threads, multi-output database - e.g. PostgreSQL, MySQL, etc.)
complient. Once someone actually wants to *use* ht://Dig for non-word-breaking scripts, then we/they/their-contacts can write the word breaking code.
Agree.
$0.02
Euro 0.01 (or 20 lire) :-)
Ciao
-Gabriele
--
Gabriele Bartolini: Web Programmer, ht://Dig & IWA/HWG Member, ht://Check maintainer
Current Location: Prato, Toscana, Italia
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.prato.linux.it/~gbartolini | ICQ#129221447
> "Leave every hope, ye who enter!", Dante Alighieri, Divine Comedy, The Inferno
------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials. Become an expert in LINUX or just sharpen your skills. Sign up for IBM's Free Linux Tutorials. Learn everything from the bash shell to sys admin. Click now! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1278&alloc_id=3371&op=click _______________________________________________ ht://Dig Developer mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] List information (subscribe/unsubscribe, etc.) https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/htdig-dev
