Version: 0.9.1 (using KDE 3.5.6, Kubuntu (feisty) 4:3.5.6-0ubuntu14) Compiler: Target: i486-linux-gnu OS: Linux (i686) release 2.6.20-16-generic If the search function near the options "AND" "OR" had also the option "NOT", the search function would be much more flexible and the second option (contains, doesnt contain, is, is not) which depends from the filter (picture date, keyword...) would be simplier. By the way: the way to change the "AND" "OR" (doubleklick) in my opinion is not the optimal resolution. Maybe a drop-down-list were better.
Interesting, I did not even know that a double click was possible on that static looking text!
Created attachment 21010 [details] Add "And not" for searches Attached is a patch which adds "And not" as third operation. Please give it thorough test! Best, Arnd
Sorry, I have not a glue how to use this patch. I'm not a programmer, I'm a meek user.
Well, you would have to compile from source, and before actually doing the compile, apply the patch, in the right directory, e.g. by patch < name_of_the_patch_file.patch If you are interested in doing this, have a look at: http://www.digikam.org/?q=download/svn (under "Install digiKam in your Home Directory") However, I perfectly understand, if you don't feel up to that task ;-) Independent of this the general procedure is: someone of the main developers has to look at the patch, decide if it is technically ok, and if so, it might get applied. Best, Arnd
I think this wish can be closed as it is implemented (and in a more flexible way). Now you can add 'As well as' which is a logical AND combined with a 'Not equal' Best regards Gerhard
The only situation in which an "AND NOT" could be helpful is when combining several blocks of searches. Josef, independent of this, does 0.9.2 work fine for you, or do we still need the "AND NOT"?
Josef, Gerhard: what should be done with this bug/patch - close or apply or ...?
I think we can close it. You can combine several blocks with "and" and "not equal" instead of "and not" and "is equal" It is the same.
Arnd, The patch is not yet applied to svn. Please unforget to do it before to close this file... Gilles
Gilles, I am not sure: - if I understand Josef correctly, he says that the patch is not needed. - However, I think that an "AND NOT" is be helpful when combining several blocks of searches. (Josef, Gerhard: I think this can be different from ``"and" and "not equal"'') Concrete example for a search: Album Name Contains Test As well as [ Tag Equals testtag ] [ Or ] [ Image Date after 03/08/2005 ] where the [ ...] indicates grouping. In this case replacing "As well as" by "And not" would give a different query, which is otherwise not (easily) obtainable. ((Well, there is one small problem: the "As well as" cannot be changed by double clicking, in contrast to the "Or")) So from my point of view the patch does add additional functionality (but of course I could be screwed in the logic here ;-) Arnd
Right. Sorry for the sound... Gilles
Reply to #10, Arnd: You cited example can be done with the current implementation: Album Name Contains Test AND NOT [ Tag Equals testtag ] [ Or ] [ Image Date after 03/08/2005 ] == Album Name Contains Test As well as [ Tag Not equal testtag ] [ Or ] [ Image Date before 03/08/2005 ] Or am i mistaken? Gerhard
Gerhard, of course you are right. This variant was what I referred to by "otherwise not (easily) obtainable". Any logical statement can be manipulated similarly to the example. For more complicated cases it might take some time until one has the logic right ;-) So this is the only reason I find why an "AND NOT" might be useful. However, I am not saying that it should be applied in svn. Presumably the best is to let this wish sleep until it comes up again (if at all) and reconsider then .. ;-)
So let's say we don't apply to 0.9.3 and you keep the patch at the side just in case.
Not reproducible with 7.0.0-beta1