Strong's Search Still Not Fixed

[Adelphos]

I've left several bug reports about the NOT operator not working in Strong's searches, but so far it hasn't been asknowledged. Thus, I'm posting again here in the hopes that it will be acknowledged and fixed.

[Adelphos]

How important is the Strong's search to you? Although it's rather tedious, verse lists can accomplish the same thing by eliminating uncommon verses between two lists. It also can reveal some rather "interesting" results compared to the straight Strong's search.

It's not that the Strong's search is so important; rather, it's the fact that the searches are supposed to work. They used to work; they need to work again.

I know I can accomplish the same thing with the GSE, and so forth, but when I want a quick search, sometimes Strong's fits the bill better.

[Adelphos]

True, it SHOULD work, and Strong's is considerably less tedious. I'll submit another bug report; who knows?

FINALLY!!!

I just got this email from Mark --

Dear Scott,
In my work with Strong's searches and in consultation with one of my colleagues here I am seeing some bugs as well. I will draft something for our programmers on it tomorrow. Thanks for passing those search examples on.
Sincerely,
Mark

Hallelujah!