always the same text in field NAMED

devic · Post by **devic** » 2004 Nov 19, 15:41

I delete every time *siteunder* and it's always there...

what can I do?

Post by **nikos** » 2004 Nov 19, 16:48

x2 is trying to help you but it seems like it only manages to upset you!
it always restores the latest name wildcard i think but it hilights the text so if you don't want it just hit backspace

also there's the clear button to get rid of past info in one stroke

fgagnon · Post by **fgagnon** » 2004 Nov 19, 16:54

That's a 'feature' where x2 pops up the last non-null name search you have used.

I suspect the reasoning is that it is expected to be more useful than an empty name field, since unconstrained searches are not allowed; however, I must agree with your tacit complaint that is an unnecessary nuisance when the last (& pethaps habitual) search constraint was not by name but by size/date/etc...

ooops, didn't see your post, nikos
... & BTW, the clear button doesn't work to keep the last name constraint from popping up again on subsequent searches.

PS - there is a workaround: use ?* for the name field, & it will 'stick' so the last used 'Containing Text' or 'Additional Rules' which pop up can be used with an unconstrained name, as desired.

Post by **nikos** » 2004 Nov 19, 17:14

clear is meant to clear everything
if you want to reuse some fields you must save them under a filter name

nice trick that *? workaround

fgagnon · Post by **fgagnon** » 2004 Nov 19, 17:18

Thanks.
I learned that one from JRz.

devic · Post by **devic** » 2004 Nov 19, 17:24

yes I know that is feature and helps me.

But if in current search I deleted value in field Named, it works like there value is *.*

In this case I'm waiting in next search time field Named to have blank field or *.*

so was early, if I remember good.

fgagnon · Post by **fgagnon** » 2004 Nov 19, 18:02

I guess I was too indirect with my first reply, devic.

nikos, the usability issue is that it is an unnecessary nuisance to have to clear (or enter *? in) the name field when the last (& pethaps habitual) search constraint was not by name but by containstext/size/date/etc... .

In other words, the complete previous search conditions should appear by default, including a blank name field, if that is what was specified.

devic · Post by **devic** » 2004 Nov 19, 18:06

In other words, the complete previous search conditions should appear by default, including a blank name field, if that is what was specified.

yeah fgagnon, exactly this I mean

longfellow · Post by **longfellow** » 2004 Nov 19, 22:29

I've found this to be a nuisance, too. It is no heavy duty to hit the backspace key, but if x2 was to remember the blank name field that would be great.

Post by **nikos** » 2004 Nov 20, 09:40

ok, i'll fix it for the next update

JRz · Post by **JRz** » 2004 Nov 20, 12:01

fgagnon wrote:Thanks.
I learned that one from JRz.

Glad I could help :P

JRz · Post by **JRz** » 2004 Nov 20, 12:03

fgagnon wrote:I guess I was too indirect with my first reply, devic.

nikos, the usability issue is that it is an unnecessary nuisance to have to clear (or enter *? in) the name field when the last (& pethaps habitual) search constraint was not by name but by containstext/size/date/etc... .

In other words, the complete previous search conditions should appear by default, including a blank name field, if that is what was specified.

I agree. I've learned to live with it (so after a while you do get used to it), but this suggestion is far better. I'm glad Nikos is 'fixing' this one in a next release.