Search++: A work in progress

Coises

@guy038 said in Search++: A work in progress:

When focus on Search++, the two shortcuts Ctrl + Shift + Y or Ctrl + Shift + E ( which open a new dialog ) wrongly add the control char EN or ENQ to current text typed in the Find dialog.

Thank you for catching that! I see it here, too. I will figure out why (no doubt it’s related to the fact that those two combinations open a dialog) and fix it.

But then, I suppose that the last line of the Replace dialog ( Do not jump to next match or Jump to next match ) and its sub-menu ( to adopt the opposite behavior ) are rather redondant and useless ? What is your feeling about it ?

I think it’s not useless because:

If you’re going to choose an option from the drop-down menu and you want opposite behavior, it’s easier to open one menu than two.
If you just click, rather than shift+click, the options on the sub-menu don’t change the Jump to next match after Replace setting, they just override it for that one command. So if you like to make a setting and keep it but only occasionally do it differently, you can do that and not have to remember to change the setting back again.

And, personally, I think that a new setting Force the 'Do not jump to next match' behavior during the X first replacements, with 0 < X < 9, would be interesting !

This sounds to me like it would be confusing to use. Your explanation is clear enough, I don’t mean that it is confusing. But using a counter that’s invisible to the user, the behavior of the same command just changes when it counts to a certain point? I can’t see it. Why would it be likely that people would want the same number of searches without automatic find every time, under all conditions?

If others also say they want this behavior, I won’t refuse to give it a try, but… I can’t say I’m fond of the idea.

I note and admit that convenient keyboard navigation of the button drop-down menu options is sorely needed, and as yet I have no good ideas for how to provide it.

Coises

@guy038 said in Search++: A work in progress:

@coises, very sorry about the supposed bug with the Bookmarks feature ! Finally, I understood that this bug happens ONLY IF you choose the ICU regex engine ! If you’re using the Plain or Regex options, everything woks as expected ;-)) Is there a limitation to use Bookmarks when the true ICU regex engine is active ?

Nothing to be sorry about — thank you for the observation, and for narrowing down to ICU. I see what’s wrong: it’s a coding error. I’ll fix it.

I even noticed that, like with the native Mark dialog, if you have, both, bookmarks and marked text in current document and that the Bookmark lines when marking text option, in Tools, is unchecked, a Remove marks and bookmarks from active document action does not clear the Bookmarks, as expected !

If you look closely, when Bookmark lines when marking text is checked, the menu item should say Remove marks and bookmarks from active document; when Bookmark lines when marking text is not checked, that menu item should say Remove marks from active document.

(I’m not sure why I didn’t make the same change to Remove marks from multiple documents…, since it also removes bookmarks as well if Bookmark lines is checked.)

It could be that this is a confusing way to do it. I intended to make the Bookmark lines setting so that when it’s checked, bookmarks and marks “go together” for Mark and Show commands and for Remove marks; but when it’s not checked, Search++ only affects marks and does nothing with bookmarks.

Except that Add selection to marked text doesn’t also add bookmarks regardless of whether Bookmark lines is checked.

This does need refinement. There is certainly some inconsistency. I do want to preserve the ability to manipulate marks without touching bookmarks at all; but which commands should affect bookmarks, and whether I need separate commands for some kinds of bookmark manipulation, remains an open question.

guy038

Hello, @coises an All,

Regarding the two behaviors of the Replace command :

First, I suppose that a special mark/sign/icon in the Search++ title zone, to clearly identify the current behavior of the Replace action, would be welcome !
Then, the user will choose its desired behavior, simply using the Ctrl + J shortcut.
And forget my idea of a new setting ! In this specific case, the user will begin using the alternate Replace behavior first then, after some tries, he would toogle to the usual Replace behavior !

Now, do we need the additional sub-menu in order to occasionally use the opposite Replace behavior, without changing the default settings, as you expressed ?

To my mind, after using this opposite behavior ( so, of course, changing the default behavior ), the user would just have to hit the Ctrl + J shortcut again to restore the previous default !

In addition, I probably forget some edge cases and, anyway, it’s your plugin, not my baby !

BR

guy038

Coises

@guy038 said in Search++: A work in progress:

Regarding the two behaviors of the Replace command :

First, I suppose that a special mark/sign/icon in the Search++ title zone, to clearly identify the current behavior of the Replace action, would be welcome !

It is indicated by the icon on the Replace button. Is there some reason that isn’t enough?

Now, do we need the additional sub-menu in order to occasionally use the opposite Replace behavior, without changing the default settings, as you expressed ?

I agree that the “opposite jump behavior” sub-menu isn’t strictly necessary, but I don’t think it does any harm, either. To my mind, the commands on that menu are still commands that “belong to” the Replace button. If anything, it’s the Jump to next match after Replace option on the Tools menu that strikes me as logically redundant; but I wanted something to which I could assign that Ctrl+J shortcut for easy switching.

If user experience indicates that the sub-menu creates more confusion than convenience, I’ll remove it.