On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 11:13 PM, Robby Findler
wrote:
> So I wonder if anyone has a
> positive experience with this kind of searching in an "in anger" kind
> of setting?
>
I've had positive experiences searching by type signature in Hoogle.
I've wished I could do the same for the Racket docs eve
2011/8/5 Stephen Chang
For online, full-text search, couldn't one just use google and add
> "site:docs.racket-lang.org" to the query?
The Google stemmer is well-suited for natural languages.
It sucks for Scheme/Racket identifiers.
Try for example to find cons* or list? .
/Jens Axel
__
On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 4:44 PM, Stephen Chang wrote:
> For online, full-text search, couldn't one just use google and add
> "site:docs.racket-lang.org" to the query?
Yeah, that seems to do it. The ordering of results is a bit odd
sometimes. I don't know the details but Google offers site specific
On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 9:45 AM, Shriram Krishnamurthi wrote:
> Noel is absolutely right.
>
> We live in an era where Search Just Works. I do dozens of Google
> searches on most days. To go from there to Help Desk is an incredibly
> jarring experience. I have to load new instructions into my hea
I suspect your related work section missed a few. (-:
On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 10:06 AM, Matthias Felleisen
wrote:
>
> It was my Diplomarbeit finished in 1983, so that makes it 28 years now.
>
>
>
> On Aug 5, 2011, at 12:17 AM, Shriram Krishnamurthi wrote:
>
>> This idea is proposed roughly every 2
It was my Diplomarbeit finished in 1983, so that makes it 28 years now.
On Aug 5, 2011, at 12:17 AM, Shriram Krishnamurthi wrote:
> This idea is proposed roughly every 2-3 years for at least 30 years.
> I am not aware of anyone having made this idea "fly".
>
> Shriram
>
> On Fri, Aug 5, 201
Noel is absolutely right.
We live in an era where Search Just Works. I do dozens of Google
searches on most days. To go from there to Help Desk is an incredibly
jarring experience. I have to load new instructions into my head:
"stick to one word", "stem!", etc., that I haven't had to use on
sea
On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 8:45 AM, Eli Barzilay wrote:
> Ah, if you mean a way to have both kinds of searches work on your
> installation
Yes.
> Well, the issue was exactly the dependency on an on-line connection
> and no user-specific docs.
For the first, the ajax request should get around it. Fo
About a minute ago, Noel Welsh wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 8:12 AM, Eli Barzilay wrote:
> > About a minute ago, Noel Welsh wrote:
> >> With the power of asynchronous requests (aka ajax) it is. I've
> >> gotta fix Myna first; maybe then I'll have a spare moment to
> >> implement it.
> >
> > Tha
On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 8:12 AM, Eli Barzilay wrote:
> About a minute ago, Noel Welsh wrote:
>> With the power of asynchronous requests (aka ajax) it is. I've gotta
>> fix Myna first; maybe then I'll have a spare moment to implement it.
>
> That doesn't help with the goal of standalone docs.
>
Sor
About a minute ago, Noel Welsh wrote:
> With the power of asynchronous requests (aka ajax) it is. I've gotta
> fix Myna first; maybe then I'll have a spare moment to implement it.
That doesn't help with the goal of standalone docs.
> [Either add a stage to the build process so docs.racket-lang.o
With the power of asynchronous requests (aka ajax) it is. I've gotta
fix Myna first; maybe then I'll have a spare moment to implement it.
[Either add a stage to the build process so docs.racket-lang.org gets
a different search to the local docs or do an Ajax request to the full
text server and, up
Three minutes ago, Noel Welsh wrote:
>
> In conclusion, I think adding full text search (e.g. Lucene/Solr)
> would have the largest impact on the existing search and this
> doesn't even require much implementation work. Pick the low hanging
> fruit!
Changing from a simple JS search that can be in
I have an unfinished analysis of searches on
http://docs.racket-lang.org/ Summary points from memory (I don't have
the data in front of me):
- Most searches are for one word, with frequency decreasing sharply
as number of words increases
- The most popular search was for list. Who the heck has
8 minutes ago, Anthony Cowley wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 1:22 AM, Eli Barzilay wrote:
> > That's not surprising -- the question is how much the
> > search-by-type feature is used vs the plain by-name searches.
>
> Search-by-type is the main useful feature. Another search engine,
> hayoo, oft
On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 1:22 AM, Eli Barzilay wrote:
> Two minutes ago, Anthony Cowley wrote:
>> On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 12:08 AM, Eli Barzilay wrote:
>> > 6 minutes ago, Asumu Takikawa wrote:
>> >> A few of us in the lab today were discussing how the Haskell
>> >> community has this nice tool call
Two minutes ago, Anthony Cowley wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 12:08 AM, Eli Barzilay wrote:
> > 6 minutes ago, Asumu Takikawa wrote:
> >> A few of us in the lab today were discussing how the Haskell
> >> community has this nice tool called Hoogle
> >> (http://www.haskell.org/hoogle) that lets yo
On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 12:08 AM, Eli Barzilay wrote:
> 6 minutes ago, Asumu Takikawa wrote:
>> A few of us in the lab today were discussing how the Haskell
>> community has this nice tool called Hoogle
>> (http://www.haskell.org/hoogle) that lets you search Haskell docs by
>> type.
>
> Are there a
Shriram Krishnamurthi wrote at 08/05/2011 12:17 AM:
This idea is proposed roughly every 2-3 years for at least 30 years.
I am not aware of anyone having made this idea "fly".
If you have a info retrieval method with useful precision&recall, but
the barrier to adoption is the user's overhead in
10 minutes ago, Asumu Takikawa wrote:
> On 2011-08-05 00:08:03 -0400, Eli Barzilay wrote:
> > Are there any *practical* uses for that thing?
>
> It could be useful if you have an idea of the name of the thing
> you're looking for and then want to narrow it down by type.
An important difference is
On 2011-08-05 00:08:03 -0400, Eli Barzilay wrote:
> Are there any *practical* uses for that thing?
It could be useful if you have an idea of the name of the thing you're
looking for and then want to narrow it down by type. Or you know you
want a higher order function that works on a list but don't
This idea is proposed roughly every 2-3 years for at least 30 years.
I am not aware of anyone having made this idea "fly".
Shriram
On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 12:13 AM, Robby Findler
wrote:
> I too tried it (ages ago) and ended up roughly where Eli is, but I
> didn't want to judge since I wasn't actu
I too tried it (ages ago) and ended up roughly where Eli is, but I
didn't want to judge since I wasn't actually trying to use it for
something useful (and, as we all know, that can change how you use
things and how well they work for you). So I wonder if anyone has a
positive experience with this k
6 minutes ago, Asumu Takikawa wrote:
> A few of us in the lab today were discussing how the Haskell
> community has this nice tool called Hoogle
> (http://www.haskell.org/hoogle) that lets you search Haskell docs by
> type.
Are there any *practical* uses for that thing?
(Not a flame, I tried it a
24 matches
Mail list logo
