I’m not even sure how many chickens I can fit on my current hard drive, but it’s probably more than the number of persons I can fit.
I’m not even sure how many chickens I can fit on my current hard drive, but it’s probably more than the number of persons I can fit.
Just today I was trying to look for something at homedepot and not only were the filters exactly like that, but they were also additive. So if I selected both “1 chicken” and “1 chickens” to cover both spellings, it would say 0 results because no product matches both at the same time.
This shit infuriates me. It is trivial to add an option for “and/or” when you have multiple checkboxes.
You don’t even really need an option for fields that are single value and compared by equality. Two distinct values for that only ever make sense as an OR filter.
I haven’t had this problem that I can recall with online shopping, but I have definitely encountered it when searching Jira tickets.
Actually, some of my most successful online shopping (or at least filtering) has been at Home Depot. They indicate where items are in their store very specifically (and usually accurately) and most of them even have Google Maps of the inside of their store. Because I can precisely locate something before I go there, I know exactly where to go when I do and can be in and out very quickly. It’s wonderful.
The screenshot is from Walmart. Their accuracy is much more questionable. I didn’t see a single chicken last time I visited. Joking aside, the website has indicated that an item was in stock in an aisle that didn’t even exist (I think it was looking at another store despite me confirming multiple times which one I had set).
In Jira that counts as a feature because Jira is explicitly designed to be as painful as possible to work with.
Sad but true.
That’s multiplicative, no? Conjunctive rather than disjunctive.
It sounds like it’s set up as an AND search, rather than the OR that any normal person would expect here.
Yeah, that’s what I mean with conjunctive instead of disjunctive.