[Geany] "Replace All" button order

[Daniel Richard G.]

On Tue, 2009 Jan 20 12:44:52 +0000, Nick Treleaven wrote:
> > 
> > But the dialog doesn't grow in height when the arrow is opened---the 
> > widgets just get squeezed a little tighter vertically.
> 
> It does the first time.

Okay, I see what you mean. Still, it's only by a little bit....

> > A persistent arrow could work, too, but... isn't that making things more 
> > complicated than they need to be? It simplifies the dialog visually when 
> > the user doesn't want to see the replace-all functionality, but then you 
> > still have that element of UI modality, and now a new config variable to 
> 
> Not sure why that's a problem (maybe my ignorance though ;-))

Just that, as the buttons are not a fixed part of the dialog, you can't 
always count on them being there, ready to click---not without the extra 
overhead of expanding the arrow. It's a small nicety to know that this 
dialog, that gets used so often and so rapidly at times, will always take 
the same form.

> > keep track of it. Not to mention, the opened arrow/label doesn't associate 
> > itself with the buttons very well if the act of having opened it is not in 
> > recent memory. (In other words, if you see the dialog for the first time 
> > with the arrow already opened, the arrow label doesn't do a good job of 
> > actually labeling the set of buttons.)
> 
> We could add a 'Replace all in:' label as well, maybe change the close
> dialog option to work for all buttons, not just replace all.

But that would change the basic behavior of the dialog, where it stays 
around until explicitly told otherwise (via the Close button or the 
checkbox). The Find dialog behaves this way, too, so there would be a 
consistency issue.

I think the checkbox and overall behavior are fine. As I mentioned before, 
NEdit does things the other way around, and I can recall feeling much more 
annoyance when the NEdit dialog goes away after one operation when I wanted 
several, than when the Geany dialog persists when I want only one op.

Ideally, I'd like to keep the checkbox/behavior, and gain the "Replace all 
in:" labeling convention---if there were a way to combine them without 
awkwardness.

> I don't mind if we remove the expander.

I'm all for that ^_^


--Daniel


-- 
NAME   = Daniel Richard G.       ##  Remember, skunks       _\|/_  meef?
EMAIL1 = skunk at iskunk.org        ##  don't smell bad---    (/o|o\) /
EMAIL2 = skunk at alum.mit.edu      ##  it's the people who   < (^),>
WWW    = http://www.******.org/  ##  annoy them that do!    /   \
--
(****** = site not yet online)