fix(search): preserve meaningful dots #9951
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
If the user searches for `Object.` or `.map`, then the dot is meaningful and shouldn't be merely treated as a word separator.
argl
approved these changes
Mar 18, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
Problem
The quick search results have become less useful for queries like
...,for..and?..Hypothesis: If the user searches for
foo.or.bar, then the dot is meaningful and shouldn't be merely treated as a word separator (as introduced in #9840).Solution
Don't treat
.as a word separator, if the search term starts or ends with it.Screenshots
...for..?.How did you test this change?
Ran
yarn && yarn devon this branch.