I’ve often wanted the same sorting change. I do, however, find yiyus’ rationale compelling. I’d be interested in playing with it, if you try it out.
> On Oct 30, 2016, at 11:16 , Mathieu Lonjaret <mathieu.lonja...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > yeah, good points. > > On 29 October 2016 at 00:47, yy <yiyu....@gmail.com> wrote: >> On 28 October 2016 at 16:23, Mathieu Lonjaret >> <mathieu.lonja...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Anyway, does anyone know what the rationale was for choosing to stack >>> them at the bottom? Or why it would be a a bad idea to make them stack >>> at the top instead? >> >> Let's suppose you have many windows in a column. When you work in one >> of them, you B2 it and put it on the top of the stack. Then you work >> on another one and it goes to the top, moving the previous one to the >> second position, and so on. This way, your most recently used windows >> are always on top, the least used ones go to the bottom of the stack. >> I would find counterintuitive that the windows you used a longer time >> ago stayed at the top, between your "working windows" and the column >> and main tag lines. >> >> But I would guess the main reason it works this way is that it seemed >> more natural to move a window to the head than to the tail of a linked >> list, and it just worked well enough. >> >> I see how it may be more practical to stack them at the top when >> working only with two or three windows, but it would be kind of weird >> if you have ten. If you feel it will fit your workflow better, it is >> probably not too difficult to get it done. >> >> >> -- >> - yiyus || JGL . >>
