XYplorer Beta Club

Is is possible to hide folders?

I do not ever want to see the recycle bin folder or the system volume information folder.

View - Show Items - Show Hidden Files and Folders
View - Show Items - Show System Files and Folders

Stretto wrote:Is is possible to hide folders?

I do not ever want to see the recycle bin folder or the system volume information folder.

As highend said, you can do so but it's globally only...you can't do it for specific folders only.

See also Config / General / Items in Tree and List.

None of these are acceptable. I do not want to hide all hidden folders but just specific ones. The configuration says not to show recycle bin and it doesn't. The recycle bin I'm seeing is $Recycle.Bin... I Also see Config.Msi which is useless to see and clutters up the tree.

It should be quite easy to add the ability to hide specific folders.

Stretto wrote:It should be quite easy to add the ability to hide specific folders.

Delete them.

• If a user hides a folder should it be hidden from the tree and the list?
• Once it is hidden what should happen should the user attempt to navigate to it through other means (Go > Go to; address bar; favorites)?
• If the user selects and deletes/copies/moves all items which are siblings of the hidden item should XY remind them about these hidden items?
• What if items within a hidden folder match the user's current search terms?
• Likewise what happens in branch view?
• How does a user unhide a folder?

It might be easy to add the feature but there's a number of questions that need answers before it becomes a good one.

i used to ask for quite same "hide folders"-feature in past. my idea was to make such places accessible only by AB direct path input(so only the one who hided it, knew "where to search"), any other access would be forbidden and path would be expeled from search, BV etc.
all that should have being provided by admin-file.

there is no need in any notification -the path is hidden and nothing should give it away. yet again, some time ago, i proposed to add "watch" function for tagged items, that would notify if delete/copy/move occurs over tagged item, or there are any in subs. that could be used to preserve important items from unintentional "malicious" operations.

eil wrote:there is no need in any notification -the path is hidden and nothing should give it away.

So you view hide folders as a security/privacy measure?

I think it would be more desirable as a means to clean up the tree/list/etc. of items the user typically doesn't use or rarely needs.

One possible solution is for XY to have a Global Inverted Visual Filter which would also be applied to the tree.
When populated this would automatically enable Persistent Visual Filters, and filter out those items.

The items could still be navigated but would be hidden from all (normal/find/branch) views.

There would be no notification when doing a select all > file op. but there would be a "notification" similar to today's VF (# items of #) or another means (new status bar icon?) for the user to identify at a glance that something is hidden - at least as an option.

This could be managed with either a new Category within the Configuration or added to List Management.


From there, Don would have the groundwork to then expand it such that there could be additional paths defined in Admin.ini and the option to not alert the user about these or allow them to be modified.


It's a thought.


I should have stated this in my previous post but let me make it clear now:
I'm not at all against the idea of hiding items, but I find it offensive when it's claimed that a vague wish would be easy to implement.

TheQwerty wrote:I think it would be more desirable as a means to clean up the tree/list/etc. of items the user typically doesn't use or rarely needs.

I think that was the OP's issue but the folders he didn't want to see are those types that I like to see always so it's a individual preference

I'm not at all against the idea of hiding items, but I find it offensive when it's claimed that a vague wish would be easy to implement.

Fully agree! We almost always have NO idea as how simple or complex a given wish is for Don...sometimes the simplest wishes are hardest to code and the reverse even happens on occasion.

.

You find it offensive that a "vague" claim is easy to implement?

lol.. Seriously?

Why is it easy to implement? I've have 20+ years of programming experience from low level hardware and embedded stuff up to newer stuff like .NET wpf, etc.

I find it offensive that a non-programmer would judge others who make claims about programming. How can you know if it is easy or not if you do not have any experience?

Why is it easy? Because When the tree view is displayed it must enumerate over each and every folder to list. This is obvious and any programmer will know this. It usually involves just a few lines of code. To hide a folder from *view* one simply has to skip over that item in the enumeration. A check must be done to know if it is to be shown or not. This is where any real work will be needed as some type of user interface must be created. It could simply be a specific text file with the folders in it to something more advanced.

Obviously when you don't understand something it seems complex... but to claim that it *IS* complex is quite offensive... or, rather, arrogant. Only arrogance can make you think you have a clue about something you've never worked with.

Now, am I saying that it will be easy to implement? Not really... cause obviously there are many ways to do it and some are more complex than others. But it is an easy programming task that any third rate programmer can accomplish. It is not trying to come up with a new algorithm to solve some new integrodifferential unified field theory.

Seeing that Don is pretty active and up to date on his code I have no doubt he can handle it. If I were you I would apologize for implying that he isn't capable of it.

Stretto wrote:You find it offensive that a "vague" claim is easy to implement?
lol.. Seriously?

Why is it easy to implement? I've have 20+ years of programming experience from low level hardware and embedded stuff up to newer stuff like .NET wpf, etc.
I find it offensive that a non-programmer would judge others who make claims about programming. How can you know if it is easy or not if you do not have any experience?

Yes, because while the basic task may be easy to do, the ripple effects on other functions can make it not so...like the list that TheQwerty mentioned.

{Rant mode=on}

Ok..you have 20+ yrs programming...yea, so you don't think some of us have any?

I began programming in 1975 (maybe before you were born?) and did it as career for 25+ yrs until I retired in 2001...did some in assembly and machine code on both home systems (pre-PC) and large systems, but most was in COBOL...while I don't have much modern language exp (I've done a bit of Perl), you can't say that we don't understand!! As one of my for-fun projects back in the late 1970's, I disassembled and commented the entire TRS-DOS operating sys so that I could make custom improvement patches for it, some of which were distributed worldwide...maybe not relevant to this, but just to show that I'm just NOT a user of PC's.

I don't want to make a big deal of this but as a relative newcomer in this forum, while we value your contributions and want you to add to XY via same, you also need to know that some of us have "worked" with Don for years so have some idea of his capabilities, ok? So diss'ng us XY veterans isn't a good way to make friends here.

Why is it easy? Because When the tree view is displayed it must enumerate over each and every folder to list. This is obvious and any programmer will know this. It usually involves just a few lines of code. To hide a folder from *view* one simply has to skip over that item in the enumeration. A check must be done to know if it is to be shown or not. This is where any real work will be needed as some type of user interface must be created. It could simply be a specific text file with the folders in it to something more advanced.

Agree that may be easy but as above, the other effects are the issue.

Obviously when you don't understand something it seems complex... but to claim that it *IS* complex is quite offensive... or, rather, arrogant. Only arrogance can make you think you have a clue about something you've never worked with.

Sorry, but as NEITHER one of us has seen the XY code...you're thus just as clueless about it as we are and the same arrogance claim applies to you...All I know is that Don has said that it's about 200K lines of code, I believe.

Now, am I saying that it will be easy to implement? Not really... cause obviously there are many ways to do it and some are more complex than others. But it is an easy programming task that any third rate programmer can accomplish. It is not trying to come up with a new algorithm to solve some new integrodifferential unified field theory.

Nobody here said it couldn't be done by Don...we just said it wasn't as simple as adding a tweak for some obscure setting because of the ramifications.

Seeing that Don is pretty active and up to date on his code I have no doubt he can handle it. If I were you I would apologize for implying that he isn't capable of it.

Repeating: We NEVER said Don couldn't do it! We just said implementing a vaguely defined wish may not be as easy as it first appears because of the impacts on other functions/features. Thus, I think it's you that needs to apologize to a couple of us who have been offended by your comments in this recent post...you have no ideas of what skills or experience we have so to make claims that you're so superior is quite insulting...am really sorry to be taking such a hard line but look at it from our POV, not yours as a relative XY forum newcomer...thanks.
{Rant mode=off}

If I've ever offended anyone, please PM me and I will attempt to make amends.
/off-topic

To reiterate...

Global Inverted Visual Filter:

• Enables Persistent Visual Filter.
• Hides all matching items from tree and all list views.
• Hidden items would still be navigable via various existing "Go to" methods.
• In line with previous bullet, using the item as a source would still allow search/branch view.
• No notification when user may have meant to include hidden items in file ops.
• An option for visible notification that there are hidden items in list. (ie "# items of #", status icon, toolbar button, or tab icon overlay.)
• List is managed in either new Configuration category or List Management list.
• Possibly extend to allow adding to list in admin.ini. These would be read-only to user.

Thoughts?

Please save your energy everybody and don't discuss this further. I'm not planning to do this. It's a can of worms and infinite troubles.

j_c_hallgren wrote:...Don has said that it's about 200K lines of code

Have been wondering for a long time how many SLOC's there were "behind the curtain".