On Thu, 2005-10-27 at 21:05 +1100, James Livingston wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-10-25 at 08:58 -0500, James Cotton wrote:
> > I'm in favor of just 1 & 2 because it seems like there would be cases
> > where the fuzzy matching might give you artists with similar names or
> > something you don't want. I will often just use a search filter to
> > create an on the fly list of songs to hear and wouldn't want to not be
> > able to limit it appropriately. However, not being able to search by
> > artist and title at the same time is often frustrating. #2 should be
> > useful too.
>
> Attached is a variant of the second patch, that has the punctuation
> stripping code from the first patch.
>
> While true fuzzy matching sounds nice, it would probably be a _lot_ of
> work to tune it so that it works well - you wouldn't want it to match to
> widely, or to narrowly.
The general consensus seems to be that most people don't need true fuzzy
matching so I've committed this to cvs.
If anyone wants to add true fuzzy matching to Rhythmbox, it shouldn't be
too hard to add. I've split the code that does the actual matching into
a separate function, which could be replaced with bits of code from the
first patch on the bug.
Cheers,
James "Doc" Livingston
--
Every fleeting thought you've ever had in your life, no matter how
bizarre, is someone's lifelong obsession. And he has a website.
-- Skif's Internet Theorem
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part