Menu

#1257 New ThreadSearch Button: Re-Do Last Search

Undefined
fixed
None
Feature_Request
2022-05-28
2022-04-16
Tiger Beard
No

I would like to suggest a mall change with high usability value. In the Thread Search add a button between the Search Button and the Search Options Button with the function Re-Do last search. This would allow to keep the search field clear as default, which is a very good thing in most use cases.

Today one has to open the combo box, move the mouse up to the very top nd select the item there. Then click on search.

Example Use case
During Debug after a fix ThreadSearch can be used to find all ocurrences of the same problem in the code. Updating the search with the same search term greatly helps to keep an overview what has been done and where still to go.
After some changes CC updates and the initial search list becomes invalid - the links do not work any more - I see that during refactoring quite often.

Discussion

  • bluehazzard

    bluehazzard - 2022-04-17

    would it be enough to simply not delete the last search? And probably automatically select the search text when clicking in the search field. This would allow quick research and also quick overriding the default value

     
  • bluehazzard

    bluehazzard - 2022-04-17
    • assigned_to: bluehazzard
     
  • Tiger Beard

    Tiger Beard - 2022-04-18

    Yeah, actually I had been thinking about suggesting that. But honestly I have been using solutions like that but I did not because

    • you do not have focus all the time in TS. When you just switch tabs and come back or switch to the editor and back, wouldn't it be weird to have the focus on that line?

    • I would not see a "selected" line as default, i.e. when I am have the TS tab open but I am not searching anything but coding in the editor

    • there is a high risk of mis-click. Ether you want to change the selected search and it vanishes or you want to replace it and it remains (so you have to select and then delete).

    • the button changes the interface (one more button) but not the dynamics of the interface. Changing the state of the search field might bring up users who find this very annoying and you might modify the solution again. The chance of people complaining about another button is lower imho.

    Considering this and the maybe higher complexity of implementing a consistentyl tracked "selected" state I though the button solution is better.

     

    Last edit: Tiger Beard 2022-05-14
  • bluehazzard

    bluehazzard - 2022-05-14

    What about:
    1) Clearing the search field after a search
    2) Leave the "search" button active. If you hit the button again, with an empty search field, the last search is repeated

     
  • Tiger Beard

    Tiger Beard - 2022-05-14

    I think that is a great solution and a fully transparent change that does not conflict with the current look&feel.

     
  • Andrew Cottrell

    Andrew Cottrell - 2022-05-17

    It may be worth also looking at the old patch in Ticket 49 to ensure that they both work together. Just a thought.

     
  • Tiger Beard

    Tiger Beard - 2022-05-17

    Looking at the code Ticket 49 has not been introduced. Its not clear why, though.
    Interestingly I never noticed that thead search was forgetting the current target or project. Since the patch is from @bluehazzard anyway hopefully he should know...

     
  • Andrew Cottrell

    Andrew Cottrell - 2022-05-17

    I only spotted it as I was going over the "open" tickets from the earliest again to see what can be closed (where closed == !open).

    I just did a quick check of the other open ticket that IMHO is outstanding to do with search that is valid is ticket 528 , but it will not affect this ticket or Ticket 49. BE aware there

     
    • bluehazzard

      bluehazzard - 2022-05-28

      FYI:
      the linked tickets are both for the native search and not related to thread search.

       
  • Miguel Gimenez

    Miguel Gimenez - 2022-05-17

    Just for the record, if you write [#528] or [#49] the tickets will be automatically cross referenced, see Artifact links in the Markdown Syntax Guide.

    [#528]
    
     

    Related

    Tickets: #49
    Tickets: #528

  • bluehazzard

    bluehazzard - 2022-05-28
    • status: open --> fixed
     
  • bluehazzard

    bluehazzard - 2022-05-28

    I have implemented this in [r12819]
    it took me longer than expected....

     

    Related

    Commit: [r12819]


Log in to post a comment.

Want the latest updates on software, tech news, and AI?
Get latest updates about software, tech news, and AI from SourceForge directly in your inbox once a month.