& as a whole word: Threat or Menace?

This WebDNA talk-list message is from

2000

It keeps the original formatting. numero = 30744
interpreted = N
texte = This one goes out to Grant, Jay, John, Support, or anyone who can come up with a good explanation,Here's a hypothetical. I'm not looking to put this into practice any time soon, and I'm not looking for a work-around. Just a little search syntax concern I have (inspired by an earlier thread):Let's say I have a database:SKU FIELD1 hello2 hello & goodbye3 &4 &&Now, if I want to find records that contain & as a whole word (records 2 and 3), I would say[SEARCH db=test.db&waFIELDdatarq=[URL]&[/URL]&FIELDword=ww], right? Well, I'm not getting the results I expect. For some reason, the && record sneaks in. Is there a reason that a & in && is considered a whole word? Setting FIELDwbrk to any number of things doesn't help (does wbrk *expand* the list of breaks or *replace* it, anyway?).Maybe this is a bug, or maybe there's some greater logic behind it that escapes me. If anyone has some insight to the inner-workings of this please speak up. I haven't tried it, but it seems like this would happen with other special characters as well (,.|[]{}) which could lead to problems.Michael-------------------------------------------------------------This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list .To unsubscribe, E-mail to: To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to Associated Messages, from the most recent to the oldest:

This one goes out to Grant, Jay, John, Support, or anyone who can come up with a good explanation,Here's a hypothetical. I'm not looking to put this into practice any time soon, and I'm not looking for a work-around. Just a little search syntax concern I have (inspired by an earlier thread):Let's say I have a database:SKU FIELD1 hello2 hello & goodbye3 &4 &&Now, if I want to find records that contain & as a whole word (records 2 and 3), I would say[SEARCH db=test.db&waFIELDdatarq=[url]&[/URL]&FIELDword=ww], right? Well, I'm not getting the results I expect. For some reason, the && record sneaks in. Is there a reason that a & in && is considered a whole word? Setting FIELDwbrk to any number of things doesn't help (does wbrk *expand* the list of breaks or *replace* it, anyway?).Maybe this is a bug, or maybe there's some greater logic behind it that escapes me. If anyone has some insight to the inner-workings of this please speak up. I haven't tried it, but it seems like this would happen with other special characters as well (,.|[]{}) which could lead to problems.Michael-------------------------------------------------------------This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list .To unsubscribe, E-mail to: To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to Michael Winston

DOWNLOAD WEBDNA NOW!

& as a whole word: Threat or Menace?

2000

Top Articles:

Related Readings: