Sorry here's the link
https://www.softpedia.com/get/Others/Miscellaneous/AnyTXT-Searcher.shtml

Russell, Am using Agent Ransack for last few years. Hence decided to read comments first before downloading. Thanks to you I came across your comment and decided to give this a pass.

Bai Ganio,
Can you please post the link to the free version?

Marshell Wooley, If you're looking for specific programs you should use the program named Everything. It will find any program or file on your computer very quickly, it's Windows Search function but x10 better and faster. This is for specific files though and not text in files.

casedistorted, Thank you so much! I downloaded and ran it and found even more patterns I had forgotten about. Excellent!

Easier to digest:
All-files-Found-unknown-matches-within-2895-files-in-18min(1084.230s) - Vovsoft "Search Text in Files" program
All-Files-Found-17369-matches-within-2902-files-in-8min-470ms - my default

Filtered(*.php)-Found-0-matches-within-unknown-files-in-1.539s - Vovsoft "Search Text in Files" program
Filtered(*.php)-Found-17272-matches-within-2888-files-in-26sec-51ms - my default

Gary,

Later on today (or perhaps tomorrow, so as to not prematurely bias today's comments), it would be good to know the title of your "default search program".

My own favorite is a wonderful, flexible, truly-professional level tool; however, it has a clunky interface and costs $199 (though well worth it for business purposes), so I'm always looking for a less expensive alternative that is trustworthy/reliable and that I can live with (retains primary search features as you oulined in your comment) for non-business/personal/casual use.

Gary, Try again without using asterisk. Apparently it doesn't support * file mask.

Gary, which is your current programm? and have you considered the reply by jake to comment #1?

Gary, What is your "current" program that you use?
Thanks,
Dan

Terry I.,
>"Good breakdown and some logical testing but I wonder if your 'go-to ' text finder was accurate in its findings or were there possibly 7 false positives? or did you check them all?"

No need to worry any longer. Both programs do produce a list of files found and both results can be exported/saved to a text file. By sorting both of those files, then doing a file comparison, it is easy to see where the differences are. Since there were only 7 files different, it was easy to open each one to see if my 'go-to' text finder was accurate. It was accurate, and after using it for more than 10 years, I always feel comfortable with its findings. Since I am working with source code, if any files were to be missed, I would be seeing compile errors and execution errors during testing. PHP is an interpreted language. In PHP, some code is used only when the logic flows that way. For example, a TRUE/FALSE test: if a function never returns FALSE except when there is an unexpected condition, the code that is executed for the TRUE side is tested often. The code on the FALSE side is not tested as much as the TRUE side of the logic flow. Suppose that side of the code is where a variable name was supposed to be found by Vovsoft "Search Text in Files" program.

In my case, if a variable name was changed in 99% of the files, but a few were missed, an "undefined" variable error would occur when the code on that side was executed. You never want to have that happen in production. Therefore, I need test sets to ensure that the uncommon side of the logic is tested by overriding the most common value (TRUE) by setting it to FALSE before executing that code. If I were to depend on Vovsoft "Search Text in Files" to find all files with a specific variable name, then I need it to be 100% accurate. After many years of using my 'go-to' text finder, I am confident it is accurate. I must also add that there was a time (win9x days/8Meg RAM) when my 'go-to' text finder would not find all files if it ran out of available memory, plus it did not report that any files were missed. Therefore, several times I had to do costly damage control before a release. Thankfully, the developer resolved that issue many years ago.

Also, I have alternatives to use as well. My default text editor now has "Search in Files" (but not replace in files). It is flawless in what it finds compared to what my "go-to' text finder program does. Many other editors are now starting to add "Search in Files" and "Replace in Files." Code/Text editors have a "whole word only" option, which generally does not exist in external text searching programs, so doing these searches in a decent editor can offer more refined searches. In addition to my default Code/Text editor (that does "Search in Files"), I also have two others that do "Replace in Files." I bought one of those just for that feature, but it has never worked, and I have had to pay a big price for 3 upgrades. The other one is intended specifically for PHP development. Its Replace in Files is 100% reliable. Therefore, I have other tools to ensure my findings are accurate compared to this Vovsoft "Search Text in Files" program.

jake,
>"Gary, Try again without using asterisk. Apparently it doesn't support * file mask."

Correct, however, it does not work the same way as the common filename mask we have been using since DOS 2.0 (wasn't there for DOS 1.0). By using *.php, only files with the extension of php should be searched. In the Vovsoft "Search Text in Files" program, using php as the Filename Filter includes files that contain the php sequence anywhere in the name (e.g., abc.php.backup and abc.php both are searched).

mariovalerio,
>"Gary, which is your current programm?"

I have left my "current" search program name out for two reasons. 1) I do not recommend any programs on these pages, and 2) it also does replacements, which would not be comparable to this Vovsoft "Search Test in Files" program. I do not have any quarrel in mentioning grep/fgrep as UNIX/Linux tools and their equivalents on the PC because they are open source. They do accurate searches. There are also commercial programs that use "grep" in the name that do both searches and replacements. Since the Vovsoft "Search Text in Files" does not do replacements, mentioning them is not fair to the Vovsoft product, however, they can be easily found online.

>"and have you considered the reply by jake to comment #1?"

Sorry, I was away for a while, a long while actually. Yes, I did make a reply. Without the asterisk does not result in the same files as a true *.xxx would. See my comment to jake for an explanation.

Gary,

I respect your unwillingness to name the titles of your "go to" tools on these daily pages, which is why I suggested waiting a day until the offer had expired before posting.

I agree that it's somewhat unfair to the GOTD offer's developer to send people off to alternatives before they have, perhaps, even evaluated the title for themselves.

And I'm guilty, in the past, of sometimes posting suggested alternatives on the day of the offer; but often wait until the next day to do so in some measure of fairness.

I also notice that several times, whether suggesting alternatives or not, my posts occasionally don't remain on these pages afterwards, so I don't know if that's due to the whims of that day's moderator(s) or some technical issue.

I've long been interested in information retrieval as these days our lives are chronicled by our digital documents. I am constantly looking for a more "universal" solution. (And it's not "fair" that only Google/Facebook/et al. should be the ones to know all about our timelines!... jk)

Would you be willing to name your favorite search/retrieval, editors, and other programs/tools on some other pages, for instance, in the GOTD discussion forum?

https://www.giveawayoftheday.com/forums/

...or somewhere else (please list the URL, of course!), or via an e-mail exchange?

Thanks!

HMarx,
>"via an e-mail exchange?"
Is that possible? If GOTD has a method of specifically you and I knowing each other's e-mail, that would work. Otherwise, if you get a temporary e-mail long enough for me to contact you, we could establish a connection that way.

Dugi, Use portable version and key store to file key.txt

Kev, This program can only deal with text files. Docx is in fact a binary file.

jake, Ah, thanks. So only with .txt files? Not quite as useful as I'd hoped.

jake, you don't know what you are talking about....
Found in Wikipedia:
"Security concerns are drastically reduced with DOCX files because the information is stored in XML, which is essentially plain text. Thus, the data can pass through corporate firewalls without hindrance".