Hi,
I would like to add the possibility for new editor's tabs to be added before/after the current tab, since I'm often annoyed by tabs added far from my working one. This is quite easy to do, but I have some questions about how to make this a preference.
Currently, the tab positioning (before/after all other tabs) is controlled by the boolean preference tab_order_ltr. Fine, but not to extend it. Then, I see two ways to go: 1. Change this to an integer (or something) that represent an enumeration: before all, before current, after all, after current. 2. Add a second preference to choose whether the tabs are added before/after the current or all tabs.
I think that 1 is probably a little better from the user's point of view (not sure), but it would probably be a pain to implement, because it would need to change the type of a preference... the problem is to keep compatibility with previous configuration version.
2 is then probably the way to go; the pref UI could even hide the complexity. But then, some question comes to my mind: a. Which name give to this preference? b. How to show it to the user?
Then as usual, I ask for your wise answers :) And as a bonus question, what do you think of the feature?
Thanks! Colomban
PS: I join a proposed implementation that lacks the preference but works fine (as far as I can think/say/see).
My 2c worth below.
On 13 May 2010 09:54, Colomban Wendling lists.ban@herbesfolles.org wrote:
Hi,
I would like to add the possibility for new editor's tabs to be added before/after the current tab, since I'm often annoyed by tabs added far from my working one. This is quite easy to do, but I have some questions about how to make this a preference.
Personally I prefer it to come up in a fixed position, but thats why its controlled by a preference :-)
Currently, the tab positioning (before/after all other tabs) is controlled by the boolean preference tab_order_ltr. Fine, but not to extend it. Then, I see two ways to go:
- Change this to an integer (or something) that represent an enumeration:
before all, before current, after all, after current. 2. Add a second preference to choose whether the tabs are added before/after the current or all tabs.
I think that 1 is probably a little better from the user's point of view (not sure), but it would probably be a pain to implement, because it would need to change the type of a preference... the problem is to keep compatibility with previous configuration version.
2 is then probably the way to go;
Agreed
the pref UI could even hide the complexity. But then, some question comes to my mind: a. Which name give to this preference?
tab_order_beside then tab_order_ltr says which side.
b. How to show it to the user?
Placement of new tabs: X at end X beside current X left X right
But then not everyone likes my UI designs :-)
Then as usual, I ask for your wise answers :) And as a bonus question, what do you think of the feature?
Not for me, but if it annoys you enough to do it, why not.
Cheers Lex
Thanks! Colomban
PS: I join a proposed implementation that lacks the preference but works fine (as far as I can think/say/see). _______________________________________________ Geany-devel mailing list Geany-devel@uvena.de http://lists.uvena.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geany-devel
On Thu, 13 May 2010 11:06:31 +1000, Lex wrote:
My 2c worth below.
On 13 May 2010 09:54, Colomban Wendling lists.ban@herbesfolles.org wrote:
Hi,
I would like to add the possibility for new editor's tabs to be added before/after the current tab, since I'm often annoyed by tabs added far from my working one. This is quite easy to do, but I have some questions about how to make this a preference.
Personally I prefer it to come up in a fixed position, but thats why its controlled by a preference :-)
Agreed :).
Currently, the tab positioning (before/after all other tabs) is controlled by the boolean preference tab_order_ltr. Fine, but not to extend it. Then, I see two ways to go:
- Change this to an integer (or something) that represent an
enumeration: before all, before current, after all, after current. 2. Add a second preference to choose whether the tabs are added before/after the current or all tabs.
I think that 1 is probably a little better from the user's point of view (not sure), but it would probably be a pain to implement, because it would need to change the type of a preference... the problem is to keep compatibility with previous configuration version.
2 is then probably the way to go;
Agreed
+1. Both ways shouldn't change how the user would control the preference in the preferences dialog. But using a second pref in the code would make it easier to keep compatibility though it isn't as clean. I still would prefer way 2 too.
the pref UI could even hide the complexity. But then, some question comes to my mind: a. Which name give to this preference?
tab_order_beside then tab_order_ltr says which side.
Agreed.
b. How to show it to the user?
Placement of new tabs: X at end X beside current X left X right
But then not everyone likes my UI designs :-)
Haha. I attached a little mockup (and code) how I would realise it though it's just my opinion. This doesn't mean it's better or worse than Lex' proposal.
Regards, Enrico
Currently, the tab positioning (before/after all other tabs) is controlled by the boolean preference tab_order_ltr. Fine, but not to extend it. Then, I see two ways to go:
- Change this to an integer (or something) that represent an
enumeration: before all, before current, after all, after current. 2. Add a second preference to choose whether the tabs are added before/after the current or all tabs.
I think that 1 is probably a little better from the user's point of view (not sure), but it would probably be a pain to implement, because it would need to change the type of a preference... the problem is to keep compatibility with previous configuration version.
2 is then probably the way to go;
Agreed
+1. Both ways shouldn't change how the user would control the preference in the preferences dialog.
Yes, true.
But using a second pref in the code would make it easier to keep compatibility though it isn't as clean. I still would prefer way 2 too.
After actually hacking the code I'm not that sure that having two preferences is necessarily worst since tab_order_ltr is used at place where tab_order_beside wouldn't make sense (when opening a session for example).
the pref UI could even hide the complexity. But then, some question comes to my mind: a. Which name give to this preference?
tab_order_beside then tab_order_ltr says which side.
Agreed.
Okay, there I go.
b. How to show it to the user?
Placement of new tabs: X at end X beside current X left X right
But then not everyone likes my UI designs :-)
Haha. I attached a little mockup (and code) how I would realise it though it's just my opinion. This doesn't mean it's better or worse than Lex' proposal.
I used your (Enrico's) design with minor tweaks 'cause I think it is more clear and doesn't change the current UI that much.
And then... there's the patch joined! Note that there is a little hackish thing in the code (with a comment, notebook.c:520 after patching), but I kept it since it is not that strange and avoids duplicating some code; but if you prefer removing in favor of duplicates, I can update the patch.
Regards, Colomban
On Fri, 14 May 2010 20:07:54 +0200, Colomban wrote:
Currently, the tab positioning (before/after all other tabs) is controlled by the boolean preference tab_order_ltr. Fine, but not to extend it. Then, I see two ways to go:
- Change this to an integer (or something) that represent an
enumeration: before all, before current, after all, after current. 2. Add a second preference to choose whether the tabs are added before/after the current or all tabs.
I think that 1 is probably a little better from the user's point of view (not sure), but it would probably be a pain to implement, because it would need to change the type of a preference... the problem is to keep compatibility with previous configuration version.
2 is then probably the way to go;
Agreed
+1. Both ways shouldn't change how the user would control the preference in the preferences dialog.
Yes, true.
But using a second pref in the code would make it easier to keep compatibility though it isn't as clean. I still would prefer way 2 too.
After actually hacking the code I'm not that sure that having two preferences is necessarily worst since tab_order_ltr is used at place where tab_order_beside wouldn't make sense (when opening a session for example).
the pref UI could even hide the complexity. But then, some question comes to my mind: a. Which name give to this preference?
tab_order_beside then tab_order_ltr says which side.
Agreed.
Okay, there I go.
b. How to show it to the user?
Placement of new tabs: X at end X beside current X left X right
But then not everyone likes my UI designs :-)
Haha. I attached a little mockup (and code) how I would realise it though it's just my opinion. This doesn't mean it's better or worse than Lex' proposal.
I used your (Enrico's) design with minor tweaks 'cause I think it is more clear and doesn't change the current UI that much.
And then... there's the patch joined!
Thanks a lot, committed.
Regards, Enrico
