Treeless Browsing

Post by **admin** » 24 Apr 2008 12:33

v7.00.0050 - The Invention of Treeless Browsing

As a spontaneous power-gag (not mentioned in change log) I added the secret scripting command "treeless" (a toggle, no arguments). Run ::treeless once and you can enjoy superfast treeless browsing! Run it again, and you are back to normal.

Beware, there are some glitches, and, of course, you should be careful with scripts that might rely on the current tree position.
One of the more obvious glitches is that when changing the path on a locked tab there will be no treeless browsing because I was too lazy to adapt this part of the code.

Another glitch is: you cannot open a path in a new tab by holding Shift or via tree context menu. It will all stay in the current tab.

However, if you just want to jump around quickly via Address Bar, Tabs, Catalog, Favorites, History, Hotlist, GoTo, UDCs, Scripts etc. ... then treeless browsing is your friend. All the time-consuming tree-work simply does not happen.

At the same time you still can use the tree whenever you want. It is just colored grey to signal treelessness and probable out-of-synch-ness...

A "synch tree" button/command may be added later... depends on your reaction.

jacky · Post by **jacky** » 24 Apr 2008 17:15

Well, I might be old-fashioned or something, but this is clearly not for me. I knew that before testing : I don't think I could live without my Tree !!

I tried just for fun, but really I rely on my Tree a lot. For D&D, to know where I am, and with a great use of boxed branches & highlighted folders, I've becomed completely addicted.

Funny thing : you said it would be grey and I had to look for it, because with my colors on Tree, I really didn't noticed, and had I not know about it, I think I could have had gone for a little while without noticing it...

Post by **admin** » 25 Apr 2008 22:24

jacky wrote:Well, I might be old-fashioned or something, but this is clearly not for me. I knew that before testing : I don't think I could live without my Tree !!

I must say it grows on me.

The next beta will come with a polished version of it, and I decided to make it official (menu command and toolbar button). All I need is a better name -- I'm thinking about "Lock Tree" or similar...

PeterH · Post by **PeterH** » 25 Apr 2008 23:16

"Lock Tree"? Lock, i.e. disable changes of tree?

As I understood, function of (as are variable refs to) tree are not available, too, so also "Hide Tree", would be wrong.
So "No Tree"?, Or "Tree Off"?

I would prefer, if tree would continue to be maintained, but only hidden. But I'm afraid, you look for the difference of speed?

jacky · Post by **jacky** » 25 Apr 2008 23:30

Disable Tree Synchronization ?

PeterH · Post by **PeterH** » 26 Apr 2008 01:11

...seems I got it wrong? (v7.00.0050)
"Treeless" doesn't mean "without a tree", but with a kind of "dummy-tree"?

(On test first I thought it had no real function: ::treeless showed a text in status line, but no change. Only after a click in another tab tree switched to grey...)

Sorry: don't understand the idea...
...but now understand the name "Lock Tree" - as this dummy-tree seems as if locked - it keeps up contents like in the moment of the "lock", no matter where you navigate.

...still not correct: I can navigate by tree - but if I navigate by any other kind ("Back" or double-click folder in list) tree is not updated? For me this is rather strange...

Post by **j_c_hallgren** » 26 Apr 2008 01:17

I've not tried it yet, but based on above discussion, maybe "Freeze Tree" or "Frozen Tree" might be more applicable...

Post by **admin** » 26 Apr 2008 09:12

jacky wrote:Disable Tree Synchronization ?

Yes, that's exactly what it's about. However, I believe the term is misleading since "Synchronization" is often used to describe what backup/sync progs do: compare and copy data between 2 locations. Totally different story.

The reasons I see for using this option are:

(1) High-speed browsing to any location no matter how deeply nested it is. For example if I quickly need to check size and version of a particular system file, it is totally pointless to expand the tree down to system32, because all I need is a quick glance at that file in the file list. Or, if I have a script that selects items in some location to copy them somewhere -- why should the tree get busy here?

(2) Keep the tree in a stable state and position while browsing. For example this can be valuable when collecting stuff from various locations via drag+drop into a couple of target folders -- no need to scroll the tree anymore: it just sits there and waits.

(3) It makes consequent use of XYplorer's many ways of going to a new place: Address Bar, Tabs, Catalog, Favorites, History, Hotlist, Breadcrumb, GoTo, UDCs, Scripts, etc. ... they all work flawlessly without the Tree, and if you just need to go somewhere to work with certain items, you may well be completely uninterested in their position in the file system -- no need for a Tree to show you.

While the Tree is an ingenious interface element one must admit that it almost always shows much more information that you need to have at any given time. So for the sake of informational economy, you now get a "stand-by" button with it.

So maybe "Tree on Standby"?

PeterH · Post by **PeterH** » 26 Apr 2008 12:04

But would I (normally) want to see the "un-syncronized" tree? For me I think: in most situations not. So I think the tree should be hidable - and it's place used by catalog (if active) or by list. (Or even InfoPane??)
But for full functions it had to have 4 possible states: shown/active, shown/frozen, hidden/active and hidden/frozen. I think Don will not be glad hearing this?

Post by **admin** » 26 Apr 2008 14:25

PeterH wrote:But would I (normally) want to see the "un-syncronized" tree? For me I think: in most situations not. So I think the tree should be hidable - and it's place used by catalog (if active) or by list. (Or even InfoPane??)
But for full functions it had to have 4 possible states: shown/active, shown/frozen, hidden/active and hidden/frozen. I think Don will not be glad hearing this?

No problem, independent hiding of tree is planned anyway.

Concerning the better name for treeless browsing I have a nice idea: I turn the logic around and called the old-fashioned normal way "Auto Sync Tree", and have it checked by default. So, you uncheck "Auto Sync Tree" to get what I've called "treeless browsing".
The nice part: "Auto Sync Tree" = AST, and "Ast" happens to be the German word for "Branch"!

So if AST is enabled then the tree always shows and highlights the current Ast!

Linkaday · Post by **Linkaday** » 26 Apr 2008 16:37

admin wrote:
PeterH wrote:But would I (normally) want to see the "un-syncronized" tree? For me I think: in most situations not. So I think the tree should be hidable - and it's place used by catalog (if active) or by list. (Or even InfoPane??)
But for full functions it had to have 4 possible states: shown/active, shown/frozen, hidden/active and hidden/frozen. I think Don will not be glad hearing this?
No problem, independent hiding of tree is planned anyway.

Concerning the better name for treeless browsing I have a nice idea: I turn the logic around and called the old-fashioned normal way "Auto Sync Tree", and have it checked by default. So, you uncheck "Auto Sync Tree" to get what I've called "treeless browsing".
The nice part: "Auto Sync Tree" = AST, and "Ast" happens to be the German word for "Branch"! So if AST is enabled then the tree always shows and highlights the current Ast!

Yeah - wonderful!

Not because i happen to know "Ast" as a german - in this world of abbreviatitis i sometimes like the way Angloamericans like to build their acronyms. This is perfectly build along that line - and more important: right to the point.

Pagat · Post by **Pagat** » 26 Apr 2008 18:51

admin wrote:The nice part: "Auto Sync Tree" = AST, and "Ast" happens to be the German word for "Branch"!

Nice pun!

jacky · Post by **jacky** » 26 Apr 2008 20:43

admin wrote:Concerning the better name for treeless browsing I have a nice idea: I turn the logic around and called the old-fashioned normal way "Auto Sync Tree", and have it checked by default.

Well, yes, but you still have the "sync" part here

That said, I realize I could actually like/use this option, if I could toggle it using script command "setting". So my scripts would do their thing without involving the Tree, that'd be pretty good actually

Post by **admin** » 26 Apr 2008 20:58

jacky wrote:
admin wrote:Concerning the better name for treeless browsing I have a nice idea: I turn the logic around and called the old-fashioned normal way "Auto Sync Tree", and have it checked by default.
Well, yes, but you still have the "sync" part here

That said, I realize I could actually like/use this option, if I could toggle it using script command "setting". So my scripts would do their thing without involving the Tree, that'd be pretty good actually

Yep, that will come. But after 7.10 is out. I decided to keep AST (resp. turning it off) in a pre-official state for now.

dgw · Post by **dgw** » 13 May 2008 17:06

If I understand this correctly, its exactly what I came here looking for.

I have a dozen of so shortcuts that open network folders. With win explorer, the folder is the top of the tree in the tree view, there is no tree expansion going on.

The address bar displays something like this:
\\fileshare01\folder1\folder2\folder3\folder4
and folder4 is the top entry in the tree view.

The shortcut command looks like this:
%windir%\explorer.exe /e,/root,"\\fileshare01\folder1\folder2\folder3\folder4"
Have you decided to include this in an upcomming version?
Note also that fileshare01 is not a mapped drive.