Android Question Advanced Search - help needed

[tsteward]

I have a local database that I want to search. At the moment I have one column named series. I can change this to two columns if need be. EG Min & Max but I don't think its that straight forward. Some have no letters and others have letter only or a mix of both.
Below is a sample.

When I enter say H2312 I want to return all records where that might be possible.
And another for line 16 below 0L213

Any suggestions on how this might be done or the best way to do it?

Spoiler: Table

Series

H0001-H3000

X8001-X9000

S0001-S2000

X0001-X8000

G0001-G2377

P0001-P2390

X0001-X2248

W0001-W2409

10001-15000

J0001-J1200

0001X-1706X

T0001-T1000

1-22185

3001-4481

E5001-E7700

0K001-0N718

8001-9554

V2001-V3200

70000-75928

J00-U39

E0001-E2500

G0001-G2500

HK0001-HK2500

J0001-J2500

K0001-K2500

KE0001-KE2500

L0001-L1037

P0001-P2500

T0001-T2500

V0001-V2500

LK0001-LK2500

40000-49999

O0001-O5000

D0001-D3000

M0001-M2618

VN0-VN1999

50000-69999

S4001-S5200

S5298-S6300

G8001-G9000

B8001-B9000

B8001-B9000

K0001-K1000

10100-12283

20100-23284

K0001-K1000

N225-N814

U1-U2000

FA0-FA1863

T1-3456

T1-26789

T5-3456

T1-T1200

Y2001-Y3000

7001-9000

E2001-E3000

E4001-E5000

E5000-E5999

E6001-E7000

E8000-E8999

L8001-L10000

NSP4000-NSP4999

NSP7001-NSP9000

G000-G3631

S000A-S999K

30010-32009

C8001-C9000

Y7001-Y8200

30001-37850

40001-41518

6001-7001

A6001-A7000

D0001-D2000

D4001-D5200

1HM1-99HM99

1NF1-99NF99

HM1-HM1200

HM2501-HM3500

HM4001-HM7350

HM6001-HM7110

NF1-NF1200

NM2501-NM3500

5001-8442

M0001-M1200

3001-4000

6001-7000

AB6001-AB6891

N6001-N7000

V1-V3056

V5001-V8058

W1-W9640

1V00001-5V12295

L000-L999

B1001-B2200 New

B1001-B2200 Old

B5001-B6200

B5001-B6200

HB1-HB2988

HB3001-HB5000

T1-T2330

HV1-HV854

HV1001-HV1918

HV2001-HV2830

 

[Mahares]

Looks interesting, but why aren't you using the text file the OP posted an read from it rather then adding each item manually.
Also, when you are posting miles of code, it is much better if you export the project to avoid copy mistakes

 

[tsteward]

Righto, third time's the charm, and giving it a break over the weekend didn't hurt either:

Okay you're officially a Mad Man ( I mean that in the kindest, most endearing way possible)
It obviously got under your skin and became a challenge for you.

I THANK YOU!!! for all your time and efforts.
Total respect

 

[emexes]

here is the reasoning behind me doing things my way

Looks interesting, but why aren't you using the text file the OP posted an read from it rather then adding each item manually.

1/ because the text file was an extract from a database (I think) and thus the OP would be replacing the text-file-reading code anyway
2/ I wanted the example to be a single code file that ran without dependencies or file-finding expeditions
3/ changes to some ranges were required, and it was easier to document those in code

Also, when you are posting miles of code, it is much better if you export the project to avoid copy mistakes

1/ ^C ^V into a new project shouldn't be introducing copy mistakes
2/ it is nice to be able to see example code directly in the forum post, without having to download and extract
3/ the example was done in B4J, whereas the OP's project is apparently B4A

 

[emexes]

It obviously got under your skin and became a challenge for you.

It did, because parsing those key codes was a puzzle remarkably similar to parsing part numbers, which is something I used to do a lot of.

If you do add "wtf is this key code" to your application, and you find cases where example code 3.0 falls over or "gets it wrong", let me know.

eg, there's already a bit of unused overkill in the default "is this code in this range" sub that might yet be useful

 

[Shelby]

Although I'm only an expert in the field of not understanding, perhaps line 234 should have the word "lower" replaced with the word "upper"? (This is meant to be a joke, but also true.)

 

[emexes]

perhaps line 234 should have the word "lower" replaced with the word "upper"?

Well spotted. Fixed. Had me startled for a moment, thinking: hang on, all the test cases worked ok, how could that mistake have slipped through?