In message <060520211841190470%nospam@nospam.invalid> nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> consider a bunch of documents and/or folders of medical specialties,
> such as toxicology, cardiology, physiology, anesthesiology, oncology,
> dermatology, radiology, neurology, and ophthalmology.

> you want to find all of them, so you search for common letters, in this
> case, 'ology'.

mdfind ology -onlyin ~ | wc -l
43
grep ology ~/Documents/newsposts/20160130-100600.news
>> for example, let's say you want to find items such as psychology,
>> biology, oncology and physiology, so you search on 'ology' because
>> however, if you want to find items such as psychology and psychiatry
find files containing "biology" and "psychology" that way. Restrictive
--- Biology psychology oncology physiology
--- Biology or psychology or oncology or physiology
And neither search would find sociology.

***END

Seems like you may have made this same flawed argument in the past (I did not
check the entire message, maybe it wasn't you.

> since the query does not begin on a word boundary, the search results
> will not be particularly helpful, as in none.

But as you can see, you are wrong.

>> > it doesn't search
>> > everywhere.
>>
>> It does... ...if you ask it to.

> not where it hasn't indexed.

Oh, that's just dumb. Yes, of course it will not search in places you have
*specifically* told it it cannot search.

--
I used to work in a fire hydrant factory. You couldn't park anywhere
near the place.

In article <slrns9b2fe.231d.g.kreme@m1mini.local>, Lewis
<g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> wrote:

> > consider a bunch of documents and/or folders of medical specialties,
> > such as toxicology, cardiology, physiology, anesthesiology, oncology,
> > dermatology, radiology, neurology, and ophthalmology.
>
> > you want to find all of them, so you search for common letters, in this
> > case, 'ology'.
>
> mdfind ology -onlyin ~ | wc -l
> 43
> grep ology ~/Documents/newsposts/20160130-100600.news
> >> for example, let's say you want to find items such as psychology,
> >> biology, oncology and physiology, so you search on 'ology' because
> >> however, if you want to find items such as psychology and psychiatry
> find files containing "biology" and "psychology" that way. Restrictive
> --- Biology psychology oncology physiology
> --- Biology or psychology or oncology or physiology
> And neither search would find sociology.
>
> ***END
>
> Seems like you may have made this same flawed argument in the past (I did not
> check the entire message, maybe it wasn't you.

i'm referring to the command-space version, which is what just about
everyone uses, not the command line.

In message <070520212033557094%nospam@nospam.invalid> nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <slrns9b2fe.231d.g.kreme@m1mini.local>, Lewis
> <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> wrote:

>> > consider a bunch of documents and/or folders of medical specialties,
>> > such as toxicology, cardiology, physiology, anesthesiology, oncology,
>> > dermatology, radiology, neurology, and ophthalmology.
>>
>> > you want to find all of them, so you search for common letters, in this
>> > case, 'ology'.
>>
>> mdfind ology -onlyin ~ | wc -l
>> 43
>> grep ology ~/Documents/newsposts/20160130-100600.news
>> >> for example, let's say you want to find items such as psychology,
>> >> biology, oncology and physiology, so you search on 'ology' because
>> >> however, if you want to find items such as psychology and psychiatry
>> find files containing "biology" and "psychology" that way. Restrictive
>> --- Biology psychology oncology physiology
>> --- Biology or psychology or oncology or physiology
>> And neither search would find sociology.
>>
>> ***END
>>
>> Seems like you may have made this same flawed argument in the past (I did not
>> check the entire message, maybe it wasn't you.

> i'm referring to the command-space version, which is what just about
> everyone uses, not the command line.

They are the same tool.

--
*** AgentSmith sets mode: +m

On 2021-05-07 5:33 p.m., nospam wrote:
> In article <slrns9b2fe.231d.g.kreme@m1mini.local>, Lewis
> <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> wrote:
>
>>> consider a bunch of documents and/or folders of medical specialties,
>>> such as toxicology, cardiology, physiology, anesthesiology, oncology,
>>> dermatology, radiology, neurology, and ophthalmology.
>>
>>> you want to find all of them, so you search for common letters, in this
>>> case, 'ology'.
>>
>> mdfind ology -onlyin ~ | wc -l
>> 43
>> grep ology ~/Documents/newsposts/20160130-100600.news
>>>> for example, let's say you want to find items such as psychology,
>>>> biology, oncology and physiology, so you search on 'ology' because
>>>> however, if you want to find items such as psychology and psychiatry
>> find files containing "biology" and "psychology" that way. Restrictive
>> --- Biology psychology oncology physiology
>> --- Biology or psychology or oncology or physiology
>> And neither search would find sociology.
>>
>> ***END
>>
>> Seems like you may have made this same flawed argument in the past (I did not
>> check the entire message, maybe it wasn't you.
>
> i'm referring to the command-space version, which is what just about
> everyone uses, not the command line.
>

They are two interfaces to the same facility.

In message <s74u5f$she$2@dont-email.me> Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
> On 2021-05-07 5:33 p.m., nospam wrote:
>> In article <slrns9b2fe.231d.g.kreme@m1mini.local>, Lewis
>> <g.kreme@kreme.dont-email.me> wrote:
>>
>>>> consider a bunch of documents and/or folders of medical specialties,
>>>> such as toxicology, cardiology, physiology, anesthesiology, oncology,
>>>> dermatology, radiology, neurology, and ophthalmology.
>>>
>>>> you want to find all of them, so you search for common letters, in this
>>>> case, 'ology'.
>>>
>>> mdfind ology -onlyin ~ | wc -l
>>> 43
>>> grep ology ~/Documents/newsposts/20160130-100600.news
>>>>> for example, let's say you want to find items such as psychology,
>>>>> biology, oncology and physiology, so you search on 'ology' because
>>>>> however, if you want to find items such as psychology and psychiatry
>>> find files containing "biology" and "psychology" that way. Restrictive
>>> --- Biology psychology oncology physiology
>>> --- Biology or psychology or oncology or physiology
>>> And neither search would find sociology.
>>>
>>> ***END
>>>
>>> Seems like you may have made this same flawed argument in the past (I did not
>>> check the entire message, maybe it wasn't you.
>>
>> i'm referring to the command-space version, which is what just about
>> everyone uses, not the command line.
>>

> They are two interfaces to the same facility.

and searching for "ology" brings up the same items, and the same news
archive post from 2016.

--
"Are you pondering what I'm pondering?"
"Well, I think so, Brain, but pantyhose are so uncomfortable in the
summertime."

In article <s74u5f$she$2@dont-email.me>, Alan Baker
<notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:

> >
> > i'm referring to the command-space version, which is what just about
> > everyone uses, not the command line.
> >
>
> They are two interfaces to the same facility.

yet they produce different results.

that is a significant failure.

In message <080520211339526923%nospam@nospam.invalid> nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article <s74u5f$she$2@dont-email.me>, Alan Baker
> <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:

>> >
>> > i'm referring to the command-space version, which is what just about
>> > everyone uses, not the command line.
>> >
>>
>> They are two interfaces to the same facility.

> yet they produce different results.

Not on my system they don't.

--
I collect blondes and bottles. ~Marlowe

On 2021-05-08 10:39 a.m., nospam wrote:
> In article <s74u5f$she$2@dont-email.me>, Alan Baker
> <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
>
>>>
>>> i'm referring to the command-space version, which is what just about
>>> everyone uses, not the command line.
>>>
>>
>> They are two interfaces to the same facility.
>
> yet they produce different results.

When using different queries, yes.

>
> that is a significant failure.

It's not a failure at all.

It's called revealing an appropriate level of complexity.

Command-space reveals one level.

Finder search a more complete level.

mdfind at the command line is fully complete

In message <s76opn$jsp$1@dont-email.me> Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
> On 2021-05-08 10:39 a.m., nospam wrote:
>> In article <s74u5f$she$2@dont-email.me>, Alan Baker
>> <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>>> i'm referring to the command-space version, which is what just about
>>>> everyone uses, not the command line.
>>>>
>>>
>>> They are two interfaces to the same facility.
>>
>> yet they produce different results.

> When using different queries, yes.

mdfind does include system file by default, where the GUI you have to
enable that. Perhaps that is what nospam is thinking of?

>> that is a significant failure.

> It's not a failure at all.

> It's called revealing an appropriate level of complexity.

> Command-space reveals one level.

> Finder search a more complete level.

> mdfind at the command line is fully complete

That's about right. Of course, if you learnt he query language mdfind
can slice and dice you results down to a very find grain

(find files containing 'ology' that are PDFs that were created in June
or July of 2014 ONLY if their file names do not contain "2014").

--
Today the road all runners come/Shoulder high we bring you home. And
set you at your threshold down/Townsman of a stiller town.