Make the search bar droppable when dragging any text on it from some text-draggable editors

[Sg4vtEv]

I use the Everything frequently in my daily work and life. Thanks for your outstanding software.

When I have various words to search in the Everything, I just don't wana Ctrl+C then Ctrl+V repeatedly. I think of more convenient ways to do that. One way is dragging the words onto the Everything search bar one by one from some text-draggable editor like MS Office Word, if the Everything provides a new droppable search bar that can receive the drag-and-drop words.

Please consider this function in the next version, thank you very much!

[horst.epp]

In Everything 1.5 you can already drop into the search bar.
______________________________________________________
Windows 11 Home x64 Version 21H2 (OS Build 22000.708)
Everything 1.5.0.1315a (x64)

[void]

Thank you for your feedback Sg4vtEv,

To enable drag-drop support on the search box:

• Copy and paste the following into the Everything search box:
  /search_edit_drag_accept_files=1
• Press ENTER in the search box.
• If successful, search_edit_drag_accept_files=1 is shown in the status bar for a few seconds.
• Restart Everything

[Sg4vtEv]

Thanks for all answering. I used Version 1.4.1.895 (x64). I followed your steps, and it's shown as you said. When the Everything was restarted, I can drop files into the search box, but there's no changing.

Actually, I wanna drop some words (not files) dragging from Microsoft Word's selection into the search box.

A further thought is:
1. Split the search box into two parts, Part A and Part B.
2. Part A has a switch that can toggle between droppable and not droppable, and has legacy properties like receiving command line parameters.
3. Part B is usually hidden, but can be expanded to show. Part B also has a switch that can toggle between droppable and not droppable.
4. There is another switch (or button) to take Part A and Part B as a set. The set can be A AND B, A OR B, A-B(exclude B from A), etc.

Think of this case when:
I have various keywords to search under "D:\downloads\", so I put a list of some keywords in the opened MS Word and type "D:\downloads\" in the Part A of the search box, then I drag the keywords one by one into the Part B.
1. Why a list of keywords? I don't wanna switch my keyboard and mouse frequently. I wish to type all text ahead, then to manipulate the mouse only.
2. Why one by one? So that I can organize my files with the same keyword more easily comparing to search the keywords together。
3. Why two parts, Part A and Part B? Part A keeps the same search options in the next search, and Part B changes different keywords everytime.
4. Why toggle droppable and not droppable? I need to protect the fixed search option from wrong dropping.
5. Why is there a relation button between Part A and Part B? I think it can make the Advanced Search more convenient, because you don't need to type searh words again, just click mouse and drag-and-drop something.

By the way, It's a bit of slow when I organized my files by dragging a file in the result list to a folder in the result list.

Please make it come true, thanks a lot to you!

Thank you for your feedback Sg4vtEv,

To enable drag-drop support on the search box:

• Copy and paste the following into the Everything search box:
  /search_edit_drag_accept_files=1
• Press ENTER in the search box.
• If successful, search_edit_drag_accept_files=1 is shown in the status bar for a few seconds.

[void]

Drag-dropping text will be available in the next major version.

If you would like to try this now, please check out the Everything 1.5 alpha.

Thank you for your suggestion.

[Sg4vtEv]

How about the further thought of two parts of the search box? I hope you can consider it. Thanks a lot again.

Drag-dropping text will be available in the next major version.

If you would like to try this now, please check out the Everything 1.5 alpha.

Thank you for your suggestion.

[void]

I will consider a split search box.

For now, please try the Everything search syntax.



Everything 1.5 will have a clipboard: search function, so you only need to copy the word to the clipboard.
This might be faster than drag-dropping.

Thank you for your suggestions.

[Sg4vtEv]

To void:

1. I want a split search box to be a medium way between the search box and the Andvanced Search (equals the Everything serach syntax's GUI), more powerful than the search box, simpler than the Andvanced Search. I have known the Everything search syntax is very powerful, but I think it's too complicated for usual search.

2. The frequent changing between keyboard and mouse is a bit of tiring. We must type the search keywords or syntax before we use the search result items of the Everything more by mouse. Therefore, it's a bit of tiring that we need to change from keyboard to mouse then reverse again and again when we have a batch of words to search. If we have a split search box (now I prefer two rows of search boxes), we first type all search keywords and syntax in some text editors, then we just need to cilck, drag and drop them into search boxes. We drag-drop fixed search syntax into one, and drag-drop variant search keywords into the other one by one. We don't need to shift to keyboard over agin.

3. Two rows of search boxes won't change the way others use the Everything. We only show the other search box when we need it, just like the favorite bar of the IE browser can be hidden when we don't need it.

4. The use of two rows of search boxes can simplify the Adanced Search by only drag-dropping, not so tiring as the use of the Adanced Search right now by keyborad typing then mouse cursor shifting and clicking.

5. Simple clipboard search function can't handle the situation of that I have a serial of keywords to search which consists of the same part (fixed part) and different parts (variant parts). So two parts or two rows of split search boxes are needed in this case.

6. Clipboard search function may result in unwanted search, or we need to toggle the function between on and of frequently. Many softwares want to read the clipboard, which may cause conflict.

English is not my mother tongue. I spent a lot of time to express my view. I hope you can get it. I wish the Everything to be easier to use. Thank you for your patience of reading and answering me.

[void]

1. I want a split search box to be a medium way between the search box and the Andvanced Search (equals the Everything serach syntax's GUI), more powerful than the search box, simpler than the Andvanced Search. I have known the Everything search syntax is very powerful, but I think it's too complicated for usual search.

I will consider an split search box that is in between the basic and advanced search.

2. The frequent changing between keyboard and mouse is a bit of tiring. We must type the search keywords or syntax before we use the search result items of the Everything more by mouse. Therefore, it's a bit of tiring that we need to change from keyboard to mouse then reverse again and again when we have a batch of words to search. If we have a split search box (now I prefer two rows of search boxes), we first type all search keywords and syntax in some text editors, then we just need to cilck, drag and drop them into search boxes. We drag-drop fixed search syntax into one, and drag-drop variant search keywords into the other one by one. We don't need to shift to keyboard over agin.

One way to do this now is to use a filter for the search that doesn't change.
Activate the filter and then drag-drop onto the search box.

A second/split search box would make this easier.

3. Two rows of search boxes won't change the way others use the Everything. We only show the other search box when we need it, just like the favorite bar of the IE browser can be hidden when we don't need it.

The second/split search box could be toggled from the View menu or possibly with a keyboard shortcut.

4. The use of two rows of search boxes can simplify the Adanced Search by only drag-dropping, not so tiring as the use of the Adanced Search right now by keyborad typing then mouse cursor shifting and clicking.

The advanced search would still be useful for setting a size range etc...
I'm guessing you would only want the advanced search to work for the first search box?

5. Simple clipboard search function can't handle the situation of that I have a serial of keywords to search which consists of the same part (fixed part) and different parts (variant parts). So two parts or two rows of split search boxes are needed in this case.

Multiple search boxes sounds like the planned 'search builder' feature.
I'll look into adding drag drop support.

search builder will have a + symbol to the right of the search box.
Click + to add another search box.
The + will change into an operator, eg: OR / AND



Thank you for the suggestions.

[Sg4vtEv]

The second/split search box could be toggled from the View menu or possibly with a keyboard shortcut.

Yeah, also a nearby button would be OK, as you said, laid to the right of the search box.

4. The use of two rows of search boxes can simplify by only drag-dropping, not so tiring as the use of the Adanced Search right now by keyborad typing then mouse cursor shifting and clicking.

The advanced search would still be useful for setting a size range etc...
I'm guessing you would only want the advanced search to work for the first search box?

I didn't mean to cancel the Advanced Search or change it. It's useful and worth to keep. Does "the advanced search works for the first search box" mean "the advanced search delivers the search words and other parameters to the first search box, as it behaves now" ?

I just mean the Adanced Search right now is too complicated for usual use. We have to find a new middle way to search, as you said, between the basic search and advanced search.

I just want the basic search box to be flexible. It can be expanded to two boxes and collapsed back to one.

Multiple search boxes sounds like the planned 'search builder' feature.
I'll look into adding drag drop support.

search builder will have a + symbol to the right of the search box.
Click + to add another search box.
The + will change into an operator, eg: OR / AND

I don't know how you design the search builder, but what you said is almost what I mean.

Let's call the two boxes as box1 and box2. Let's call the different keywords I want to search as A, B, C, D and etc. I type A in box1 and B in box2, then I press the "AND" operator button. The result of "A AND B" will be shown in the list. What if I want to exclude C from the result? You make the AND operator button have a dropdown menu that lists "add to box1" / "add the same filetype to box1" / " add the same folder to box1" /etc. So when we click "add to box1", box1 becomes "A AND B", box2 becomes empty, and the result list keeps. I drag C from the result list and drop C onto box2, then I press the "NOT" operator button. The result of "(A AND B) - C" will be shown in the list. We can continue search D as the same (i.e. click the list under the "NOT" operator button's dropdown menu ) if we want to have a mixed result between D and "(A AND B) - C". All these procedures don't need much keyboard typing, especially of two hands.

Thank you for your patience of reading this!

[void]

I didn't mean to cancel the Advanced Search or change it. It's useful and worth to keep. Does "the advanced search works for the first search box" mean "the advanced search delivers the search words and other parameters to the first search box, as it behaves now" ?

As it behaves now.
Perhaps the Advanced search could be populated off the active search box.
For example: if the second search box is selected, the advanced search will populate from the second search box and also set the search in the second search box.

Let's call the two boxes as box1 and box2. Let's call the different keywords I want to search as A, B, C, D and etc. I type A in box1 and B in box2, then I press the "AND" operator button. The result of "A AND B" will be shown in the list. What if I want to exclude C from the result?

There would be a NOT operator too.

The current plan is to add a separate dialog for the search builder. (not what you want unfortunately)
Depending on how useful this is it might be merged into the main UI. (more inline with what you are asking)

Thank you for your suggestions.