Blueprints of pane.ini + branch view question

[admin]

Are these wishes?

For me the main point is if behavior changed from pre-ET to now. And currently (with my Beta here) I don't think so.

[TheQwerty]

Bug which ET introduced: From v13.20.0001 through v13.70.0103, the default sort order for BV was 'Path,a'. Since v13.70.0111 it is 'Name,a'.

Thus there is a bug in my script, the first echo should say 'Should be Path,a' instead of 'Name,a'.

EDIT: You mentioned this so I assume future-beta has it fixed.


Bug that predates v13.20.0001, mis-match of expectations, or wish: Branch View does not retain its sort order, but it should.
A consequence of the current behavior is that it can overwrite the user's desired and stored sort order for search results.


Any clearer?

EDIT2: I've corrected the script I had posted and made the echo's a little more descriptive.

[admin]

Branch View does either of two things, depending on the setting of "Default to tree-like sort order" (Find Files & Branch View - Branch View):
a) default to Path ascending (good for tree-like sort).
b) keep the current sort order (good for toggling between normal mode and BV).

This is the state of affairs for a long time, and it still is today AFAIK.

[TheQwerty]

I'm now thoroughly confused... I think disabling that is more in line with my expectations, but maybe not quite.

I might just be complicating things, so I'm going to let Marco chime in instead.

[admin]

Check the old versions. AFAIK it has never been different fora long time.

[TheQwerty]

Check the old versions. AFAIK it has never been different fora long time.

I'd believe that, but that just means it has never worked exactly as I'd expect.
Though that's fine, I'm not a heavy BV user and it's not so far off from my expectations that it is a problem... for me.

Just spit-balling here...
Converting Branch View into a List Mode would allow it to retain its own sort order, column configuration, and various other list settings, correct?

Would it be difficult to do this?
What drawbacks would this create?
Does it make any sense to make it a list mode instead of whatever it is now?

[admin]

This would be INCREDIBLY COMPLEX. I'm not in the mood for this (and I don't even see the necessity).

[Marco]

Sorry for my silence yesterday, I'll now reply properly to everything.

Script of TheQwerty [on a 13.70.0127, fresh]:

Code: Select all

"Test"
 // Set ListBrowse.Sort to Name,a;Type,d.
 goto <xy>;
 SortBy 'Name', 'a', 0;
 SortBy 'Type', 'd', 1;
 Status 'Sorted by Name,a;Type,d';

[/size]Fine till now.

Code: Select all

 // Enable Branch View.
 // This should use the default sort order of ListFind/BV.
 #311;   //View | Views | Branch View
 Echo "What's the sort?<crlf>It should be the default for BV which was Path,a";

[/size]OK, correct.

Code: Select all

 // Sort BV by Name,a;Ext,d.
 // By extension this should change ListFind's sort as well.
 SortBy 'Name', 'a', 0;
 SortBy 'Ext', 'd', 1;
 Status 'Sorted by Name,a;Ext,d';

 // Disable BV, returning to ListBrowse.
 #311;
 Echo "What's the sort?<crlf>It should have restored the order from before BV which was Name,a;Type,d";

[/size]Restored correctly.

Code: Select all

 // Enable BV, it should retain Name,a;Ext,d but doesn't.
 #311;
 Echo "What's the sort?<crlf>It should have restored the order from last BV which was Name,a;Ext,d";

[/size]Nope. It falls back to the BV fresh default, ie Path,a.

Code: Select all

 // Disable BV.
 #311;

 // Enter ListFind.
 // When we changed the sort in BV it "should" change the sort here.
 #261;   // Edit | Find Now
 Echo "What's the sort?<crlf>As BV and ListFind share settings this should have the restored order from last BV which was Name,a;Ext,d";

[/size]Nope again. It falls back to the BV/ListFind fresh default, ie Path,a (as you say and as I was able to find myself out, both view are internally saved as the same LisFind view - very important point imo, I'll talk about it later).

Code: Select all

 // Change Sort order of Search Results to Name,a;Size,d.
 SortBy 'Name', 'a', 0;
 SortBy 'Size', 'd', 1;
 Status 'Sorted by Name,a;Size,d';

 // Enable BV (with active Search Results tab)
 // It correctly sorts by Name,a;Size,d.
 #311;
 Echo "What's the sort?<crlf>As BV and ListFind share settings this should have the order set in Search Results which was Name,a;Size,d";

[/size]Correct.

What the script is attempting to demonstrate is that:
1) If the active tab is not a search results tab > entering branch view will use some default sort order.
2) Changing the sort order in branch view, exiting branch view, and then returning to branch view will return to the default sort order.
3) If the active tab is a search results tab > entering branch view will adopt the sort order of the search results tab.

This is not entirely demonstrated in the script, but it is true.
4) Customizing the sort order in a search results tab, returning to browse mode, performing step 1 or 2, and then performing a search will result in the search results tab forgetting the user's defined sort order and instead using the default as set by BV.

I can confirm all this!

Now, I did a huge mistake on Monday night 'cause I accidentally deleted the pre-ET config. I wonder if I suffer from dementia 'cause now I'm not totally sure anymore that BV remembered its sort order. But the current behaviour is flawed in my humble opinion.
If you customize the columns in BV and then click "Define current column layout as default" the subsequent message says that the layout has been saved for the Find view. So BV and Find share the same column layout, and as such modifying the layout in BV should make it available in Find view afterwards, and viceversa. As of now, instead, there's some sort of race condition where BV calls an internal default and then overwrites the customization. And I'd call it a bug.
All this regardless of the explanation/clarification below:

Branch View does either of two things, depending on the setting of "Default to tree-like sort order" (Find Files & Branch View - Branch View):
a) default to Path ascending (good for tree-like sort).
b) keep the current sort order (good for toggling between normal mode and BV).

Since BV and Find view are both searches, shouldn't there be a third option "apply the Find view"?

Little background: my default Browse view is Ext,a;Name,a. Is a good way for me to have files grouped by type and sorted nicely by name (thank you secondary sort order! ). When I switch to Find View or BV I give more importance to the paths (it gives the tree structure), but I still want some sorting within each folder, that's why I go Path,a;Ext,a. If ( ) multiple sort orders were available (ternary, quaternary,...) it would be damn cool, because the sorting of the Browse view could be entirely replicated adding the tree dimension too.

[admin]

If you customize the columns in BV and then click "Define current column layout as default" the subsequent message says that the layout has been saved for the Find view. So BV and Find share the same column layout, and as such modifying the layout in BV should make it available in Find view afterwards, and viceversa. As of now, instead, there's some sort of race condition where BV calls an internal default and then overwrites the customization. And I'd call it a bug.

Yes, I saw that too. Not sure whether I'd call it a bug or interesting behavior, but currently I only want to restore the way it worked pre-ET. Later we can talk about redesigning BV.

[TheQwerty]

currently I only want to restore the way it worked pre-ET.

Which I think you achieved by making BV use Path,a again.