If you add anything after <date> in dm:<date>
like dm:past2dxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
the xxxxxxxxxxxxxx is ignored.
Is this by design?
[Solved] dm:<date> question
-
w64bit
- Posts: 338
- Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 9:06 am
[Solved] dm:<date> question
Last edited by w64bit on Tue Aug 02, 2022 1:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
horst.epp
- Posts: 1643
- Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2014 3:24 pm
Re: dm:<date> question
And what is your expected result ?
Syntax Error or no results ?
Syntax Error or no results ?
-
void
- Developer
- Posts: 19903
- Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2009 11:31 pm
Re: dm:<date> question
Yes, the xxxxxxxxxxxxxx is ignored.If you add anything after <date> in dm:<date>
like dm:past2dxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
the xxxxxxxxxxxxxx is ignored.
Is this by design?
Everything will try to be as forgiving as possible.
In this specific case, the d will match days.
dm:past2dxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
is the same as
dm:past2days
I have on my TODO list to support the following syntax:
dm:2days12hours
Currently, Everything ignores the 12hours part.