Nice update. +1.

Thanks, glad you like it :)

Next update is here. You can now search within search results, as requested.

I haven't had any issues with the limited testing I've done, but I wouldn't be surprised if there were some bugs in this one... so just let me know if you have any problems and I'll try and sort them as quickly as I can.

Enjoy! :)

It is now ;)

Looks good!

No actual update here, but just a small warning... I noticed the latest Barefoot Essentials update gives you the option to drop the hash off the end of the forum URLs. Doing so will probably break the search script as, in my infinite wisdom and laziness, that's what I use to tell whether your on the forum or in an actual thread to perform the two different types of searches.
I will look into using a different method as it's probably going to cause problems for anyone who does wish to use the new feature.

I am also still trying to figure out a way of extending the forum search to search inside threads (and the search in general to cope with more than a few hundred pages) but I so far haven't come up with anything that doesn't involve me saving a copy of the forums somewhere and performing the searches on that... Or just waiting half an hour for your search results...

Thanks for the warning, for I have indeed enabled BE's new feature. Welcome to the ever-mutable world of application maintenance.

However, I must say that I was unable to find a problem with either a forum search or a thread search, though I have only tested both very briefly.

Seems you were right.

Forum search is broken. Tried looking for "gog", "forum", "lego" on the general forum with end page = 5. Got nothing. Disabled BE. Worked fine. Reenabled BE. Again broken.

Thread search is fine.

That's a damn shame... Thanks for letting me know. Looks like finding an alternative it is.
I was planning on doing some work on it and adding some new features anyway.

Can't you count the slashes? If forum/{string} or forum/{string}/page# then forum, else if forum/{string1}/{string2} then thread?

Yeah, possibly. I did originally think of just counting them, but the page thing messes it up so I'd have to work around that (which is doable) but I think there might be an easier way, by just checking if an element that only appears on the forum pages exists (it just means finding an element that's in every forum and isn't on threads)

Right, new update in. I've changed the method it uses to recognise forum pages so it (hopefully) shouldn't clash with BE any more. Let me know if still causes trouble.

And we have a new feature! You can now search for more than one term at a time.
Right now it splits on a semi-colon (;) and trims the whitespace at either end of all the sub strings but if anyone thinks this might be a problem I can change it.
The way I see it, if you want to search for a phrase that contains a semi-colon it shouldn't effect it as it would just search for both halves of the phrase. The only trouble would be if you wanted to search for just a semi-colon, but I can't see many people wanting to do that.

I'm wondering if anyone would like a highlight for search terms within results? I'm not generally keen on it, but I could put it in as an option (I can't see it being too difficult to achieve, but I may eat those words...)

I've also reworked some elements of the searches, so if I've inadvertently broken anything just let me know.

Anyway, report any issues to me as usual and enjoy!

Thank you. +1.

Some issues:
1) I updated to 0.4.3 but the displayed version (beneath "Go") stills read 0.4.1.
2) Searched the forum, looks good.
3) The ability to search for multiple terms is nice and useful. Cheers. I understand the semicolon serves as an OR operator. You might want to also implement an AND operator. Probably easy for forum search, I expect, but more challenging for thread search. For the latter, I would define AND as both words appear in the same post.
4) As for choosing the semicolon for the operator. I think you're safe, as long as GOG does not add this game to its catalogue.
5) I would actually appreciate search term highlighting as an option (or as the default).
6) Kept the most important for last. Did a thread search on this thread, searching for "mount", first page: 198. The search seems to hang. Same for any other thread search. Basically, unable to do thread searches at the moment.

Suggested feature: Add an "abort" button for cases where I launch a search in a 100+ page thread only to realise I forgot to add a first or end page (very often the case).

1) No idea why, but it seemed to have replaced the variable with a hard coded value... should be ok now (or with the next update anyway)
2) Great :)
3) Yeah, I was thinking of it but wasn't sure how to go about it... should it be an extra term like in Google? (first term; +second term) or should the separator be different? Or should I just put an option in to change whether it is AND or OR?
My problem is mainly how to deal with cases where both separators are used.. so having to choose do to and AND search or an OR search seems the logical choice... I will certainly consider it.
4) Lol. I was going to go for something a bit more obscure (like | or ¬ or something) but figured that it doesn't effect the search overly much anyway so might as well use something easy to find and remember...
5) I'll see what I can do then, I imagine it shouldn't be too difficult, but we'll see.
6) Hmmm. I'll look into it. Thread searches seemed to be working for me. But I did rework the code in places so something may not work. I'll try replicate your search and see what happens.

To be honest, it does auto limit to 300 pages so while it might take a few minutes it shouldn't crash, but I'll see what I can do for implementing an abort function too.
I can't replicate your issue... searching "mount" on the update thread returned quite a few results, 99 in 27 seconds.

Are you still having trouble?

I would use another operator (e.g. & or ^ or #).

As for parsing order, I recommend you go simple and always process left to right, so:
- A or B and C is (A or B) and C
- A and B or C is (A and B) or C
- A and B or C and D is ((A and B) or C) and D
Not very intuitive to new users but probably easier to implement and good enough.
Based on my experience, I assume this is easiest, but if there's something easier, go for it instead.

P.S. The AND operator is a nice-to-have. Not urgent at all.

At the moment I just split the search term on ; and then loop through the array of the results and filter for each term... the easiest would be to split on ; for OR first and then split again for AND... but the logic may not make much sense that way.
So to use your examples it would be:
- A or B and C is A or (B and C)
- A and B or C is (A and B) or C
- A and B or C and D is (A and B) or (C and D)

But I'll have a think about it.