Search Syntax does not have a "not equal to" operator, <> is not treated as < or >

posted on October 22, 2021

The <> operator is what is in the search syntax operators documentation, replacing !=.

In order for <> to work as != it would need to evaluate as < or > not < and >.

At least for numbers, but I would like a != for all objects.

Anyways, trying with numbers (which must be surrounded in quotes when using search syntax but are still treated as numbers)

Here I am testing with an entry that is in a volume with an id of 2.

If I evaluate ="2", I get a positive result

If I evaluate <"6", I get a positive result

If I evaluate <>"6", I get a negative result
But if 2 is not <>6 then <>6 can not contain numbers less than 6, which means <>6 is not equivalent to !=6 which would include 2,3,4 etc

0 0

replied on October 22, 2021

The search syntax does have a "not equal" operator. However, not all searches support a "not equal" search. For volumes, you can use =0 to search for folders not assigned a default volume.

0 0

View 3 previous replies

replied on October 22, 2021 • Show version history

Right, it does not have a not equals to. But the operators documentation says that it does and it references it as <>. <> could never be used in any search because it does not include both less than and greater than results. Nothing can be both less than and equal to.

https://doc.laserfiche.com/laserfiche.documentation/en-us/Default.htm#Search_Wildcards_Operators.htm%3FTocPath%3DDocuments%7CSearching%7C_____4

0 0

replied on October 22, 2021

"<>" is actually common notation for "not equals". It does not mean "the result has to be both greater than and less than the specified value at the same time".

0 0

replied on October 22, 2021

But 2 is less than 6, that is the absurdity of the operator here. It does not include numbers less then the value

0 0

replied on October 22, 2021

You are conflating 2 issues. Volid search does not support "not equals" searches. If you were to use "<>" in a search that supported it, say, like a number field or entry ID, it would return values that are either greater than or less than 6.

0 0

replied on October 22, 2021

Well in that case, without using operators, how do I exclude entries in an archive volume from my search using the graphical interface?

I started with building a search using the normal GUI. But I saw no option to exclude entries in a volume, so I switched to search syntax which of course uses operators. This is the first time hearing that operators are dependent on what search object your working with when modifying the search syntax.

Am I going about this whole thing wrong? They just want to exclude these entries. Should we also tag everything in these volumes and search by tags?

What is the best method to exclude large amounts of archived entries in specific searches.

0 0

replied on October 22, 2021

The search user interface covers most commonly used searches. The advanced search syntax covers more advanced options. For volumes, the only supported search is for a specific volume ID (with a special case for volume "0" as indicated in your other thread).

0 0

Discussion

Discussion

Search Syntax does not have a "not equal to" operator, <> is not treated as < or >

Comments 7

Follow-Ups 0

Sign in to reply to this post.