On Sat, Dec 10, 2011 at 9:25 PM, Erick Erickson <erickerick...@gmail.com> wrote: > My off-the-top-of-my-head notion is you implement a > Filter whose job is to emit some "special" tokens when > you find strings like this that allow you to search without > regexes. For instance, in the example you give, you could > index something like...oh... I don't know, ###VER### as > well as the "normal" text of "IRAS-A-FPA-3-RDR-IMPS-V6.0". > Now, when searching for docs with the pattern you used > as an example, you look for ###VER### instead. I guess > it all depends on how many regexes you need to allow. > This wouldn't work at all if you allow users to put in arbitrary > regexes, but if you have a small enough number of patterns > you'll allow, something like this could work.
This is a great suggestion. I think the number of users that need this feature, as well as the variety of regexs that would be used, is small enough that it could definitely work. I turns it into a problem of collecting the necessary regexes, plus the UI details. Thanks! --jay
