[ic] Different mv_substring_match for diff. fields (resolved + patch)
docelic at spinlocksolutions.com
Thu Jul 3 19:45:46 UTC 2008
On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 14:18:33 -0400
Mike Heins <mike at perusion.com> wrote:
> > So the proposed solution is:
> > Instead of turning off mv_coordinate, let's just ensure that the
> > number of search specs matches the number of search fields. (Taking
> > user's setting of mv_coordinate=1 as a sign that he wants it to
> > happen).
> Can't happen. We could add an "mv_force_coordinate" or something,
> but we can't just change this behavior willy nilly.
But as I figure it, having mv_coordinate=1 and a non-matching
number of search specs and search fields is not a legitimate
combination anyway, so this change would not break any valid search.
I suppose it'd break only for people who had an incorrect search
in the first place.
I had mv_force_coordinate in mind myself too (which would also have a
'fc' shorthand available) but do we need it?
I mean, this isn't a "glitch" in the code that turned out to have
unexpected side-benefits and that people started relying. This is just
some unuseful code path that was never mentioned or advertised by
More information about the interchange-users