Hi Doru, Definitely, it would be a great addition. I really like spotter but I still need to open some browser or playground to search implementors or senders. This feature + a way to perform exact match will avoid to open extra windows and to loose time.
Keep pushing, Christophe Le 11 janv. 2016 à 23:34, Tudor Girba a écrit : > Hi, > > So, I still did not express myself clearly :). > > #s is not a new shortcut. It’s just a filtering mechanism based on the the > name of the category. So, you can also write: > > #s something > #sen something > #senders something > > On top of this, we are looking for solutions to have a way to use some > shortcuts. > > I like the idea of having Cmd+n to add the text #senders to the query text. > We have to see if this can work. > > Cheers, > Doru > > >> On Jan 11, 2016, at 5:59 PM, stepharo <steph...@free.fr> wrote: >> >> Why #s >> Senders shortcut is since ages Cmd-n >> >> Why do you want to force people to remember two different shortcuts. I do >> not get it? >> >> Sorry but I did not get at all what is & and personnally I'm not sure that I >> want to understand. >> >> Stef >> >> Le 10/1/16 22:26, Tudor Girba a écrit : >>> Hi Stef, >>> >>> Thanks for taking the time. I think I did not express myself properly in >>> the previous mail because we are not really in disagreement :). >>> >>> The basic mechanism you talk about exists already in Spotter. Let me >>> explain. When you type: "#e graphs", you will get two examples (and only >>> the example search is being performed). >>> >>> <Mail Attachment.png> >>> >>> This works because the name of the “Examples” category starts with “E”. >>> >>> Until now we did not have a top level processor that would search for >>> Senders (only inside a method). So, because of this you could not search >>> for them at the top level. In the meantime Stefan just finished >>> implementing it, the name of the category is Senders. So, you will type “#s >>> something”. >>> >>> <Mail Attachment.png> >>> >>> I now made the category name start with # so that it is closer to the way >>> to query for it. So, when you do not know how, you will just search for >>> “something”. Then you will discover the #Senders category, and then you can >>> learn that you can search for it. >>> >>> Now, you seem to be saying that instead of “#s something” you want to type >>> “#n something”. For this we would need to find a solution to reconcile the >>> two. My proposal was to maybe introduce something like “&n something” to >>> distinguish between the string match of a category name and a “shortcut” (I >>> do not know how to call it). I can see how to do this technically, but I >>> still think this is less discoverable then the filtering by the name like >>> described above, and it would be an extra mechanism. We could add this >>> shortcut next to the category name to address this issue. The interesting >>> thing about the shortcut is that we could possibly make it less ambiguous. >>> For example, if you have two categories starting with #S, you will get both >>> when you type “#S something”, which is less ideal for a common case. So, >>> there are pros and cons. >>> >>> Now, what is missing is a top level category for References, and I really >>> think we would have what you wanted (and it is a good goal). The cool thing >>> is that we would be solving this problem with a generic mechanism. >>> >>> So, what I am suggesting is to invest a bit in categories (#Senders can be >>> integrated now) and then we play with it. >>> >>> Is this explanation clearer? Did I misunderstand something? What do you >>> think? >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Doru >>> >>> >>>> On Jan 10, 2016, at 10:23 PM, stepharo <steph...@free.fr> wrote: >>>> >>>> Ok my last attempt :( >>>> >>>> When I look for something there are two cases >>>> >>>> - most of the time I ********************KKKKNNNOOOOOOOWWWWWWW********* >>>> is it clear? I know I know I know what I look for and I WANT THE FASTER >>>> WAY TO GET IT >>>> => no three clicks and strange navigation. >>>> >>>> I want the sender of this message (not the implementors the sender) >>>> I want that package >>>> I want the references to this class (not the class and the refs that >>>> class) >>>> and I'm ready to learn >>>> #N for reference >>>> #n for senders >>>> #m for implementors >>>> Because they are the same. >>>> #e for example like in the finder >>>> >>>> - looking around and the system can propose me something >>>> and I can navigate and think. >>>> >>>> But this is ok I just use Spotter to open the class browser and all the >>>> rest I do it with shortcuts. >>>> I tried to help but I failed. >>>> >>>> I will present Spotter as the great tool to open browser because I cannot >>>> use it otherwise and >>>> nobody around me can show me on the spot something more efficient than a >>>> shortcut in a workspace. >>>> Or may be I will simply not spend energy doing a videos on Spotter because >>>> to me this is not ready >>>> and far less usable than it is supposed to be. >>>> >>>> Now to me Spotter is taking a lot of classes for the gain I get. What >>>> esteban did or what is in Squeak >>>> is working perfectly for me because Spotter does not let me express my >>>> needs. >>>> So may be you have other needs but I would like to know how people really >>>> works and not >>>> how Spotter should be usefull. >>>> >>>> The video of dimitry shows that well: Just browse a class and sometimes >>>> you get an implementor >>>> May be you do not like my mail because they look aggressive but when is >>>> the last time >>>> you did a real study with users that were not already convinced. Or may be >>>> with users >>>> that loves just one tiny feature and not the one you think that they use? >>>> >>>> And BTW it hangs my images two times with 4.0 when I was in africa and >>>> this was annoying. >>>> Stef >>>> >>>> >>>>>> I do not get why you cannot >>>>>> - have a set of fixed most used queries and this will create a small >>>>>> vocabulary that can be extensible >>>>>> and it can be mapped to what we do with shortcuts = reduce cognitive >>>>>> load >>>>>> and then a full search when you do not know what you are searching. >>>>>> This is not exclusive and it works for the two scenario. >>>>> >>>>> I understand the intention, but I do not understand how these fixed >>>>> queries are any different than we have now. When you are on the top of >>>>> Spotter, when you query, you get always the same processors being >>>>> executed. At first you will not know their names, and you will scroll. >>>>> And if you see them, you might remember them and reproduce afterwards. >>>>> It’s a discoverable learning process that you do not have to remember. >>>> >>>> Because with these wonderfull queries I do not get what I'm looking for. >>>> Because the system is trying to guess what I have in my mind and this >>>> system is not good for that because I'm thinking about >>>> the metallica song I'm listening. >>>> >>>> >>>>> The only part that is not discoverable is that # introduces a category >>>>> search. Thinking loud, I just thought that we can make the label start >>>>> with # like this (I committed this change): >>>> >>>> Sorry but I do not get it. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> <Mail Attachment.png> >>>>> >>>>> We also thought of having completion as soon as someone type #. So, you >>>>> have a kind of a dropdown for the available categories, but we did not >>>>> get to implement that one. This should solve the discoverability problem >>>>> even more. What do you think about that? >>>> Why not >>>> but just a ghost with >>>> #n printOn: #m #N .... >>>> would be a huge improvement >>>> >>>> Each time I used Spotter to look for something more than a class I could >>>> not find it. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> Regarding the shortcuts, we could associated such shortcuts with a >>>>> processor, but I would first want to see if we cannot manage to produce a >>>>> solution with the current set of options. >>>> >>>> I was not saying shortcuts and I was thinking the same vocabulary >>>> >>>> Cmd+N >>>> #N >>>> Cmd+m >>>> #m >>>> Cmd+n >>>> #n >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> I was discussing with Luc and he made a fun but sad remark >>>>>> "Since people do not understand well spotter they most of the time >>>>>> only use it to open a class. >>>>>> And this is something that he already had before." >>>>>> I briefly looked at the Youtube video of Chloupis and >>>>>> So you can have a generic super cool tool, if people do not use it it >>>>>> defeats its purpose. >>>>> >>>>> Certainly. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> You can be really happy because you go fast with it but you only. >>>>> >>>>> That is not really true :). >>>> >>>> See my remark above. >>>>> >>>>>> So making sure that the most used actions are really supported is >>>>>> important. >>>>> >>>>> Of course it is. For Senders we did not find a good solution yet that is >>>>> reasonably fast and useful. Stefan and I are still literally working on >>>>> this. I think we should be able to have a solution, but we have to see if >>>>> it is reasonable enough. We will announce it once we have it working. >>>> >>>> the problem is that you want to solve everything at once. While the divide >>>> and conquer is the solution for the first >>>> scenario I mention. I do not need something that crawls the entire system >>>> when I have one precise query. >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> But, really, this tool more than anything allows one to play with >>>>> possibilities in a couple of lines of code. We want people to play (some >>>>> did) and to get concrete feedback and possible solutions. I think we >>>>> should not just say that we need something else before we actually play >>>>> with it a bit more. >>>> I do not get it. >>>> I never worked with me. And so far I did not see anybody succeeding to >>>> show me how to find something that I cannot >>>> find faster with a shortcut. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>> But more important the discoverability is important because there is not >>>>>> even a help. >>>>>> Right now as a user I can only guess and often I close spotter and use >>>>>> my shortcuts. >>>>>> As a user I see something that ask me about network (and I do not care) >>>>>> but nothing >>>>>> that brings me to the next level. >>>>> >>>>> This is something we need to work on, but you know, time is limited for >>>>> us, too. >>>> >>>> Add a button and an help text copied from your blog! >>>> And you will have made a 100% documentation jump. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Most of the time the user forgets the key combination (may be this will >>>>>> be solved with >>>>>> the cool shortcut reminder we developed and is under review) >>>>> >>>>> All actions in spotter have a visible icon. All. And if you hover over it >>>>> you get the command. And there are literally 5 such actions. What is >>>>> missing in this regard from your point of view? >>>> >>>> I do not know >>>> They do not cover what I want to do. >>>> I do not care of setting >>>> Most of the time I do not care about seeing all. I saw now that you >>>> have an arrow to show more than the top 5 >>>> good but again Cmd-shift > is not easy to type and give pain. >>>> I do not understand why I should dive in most of the time. >>>> >>>> I realised that I could use Spotter when I saw that I can press shift >>>> under the return because >>>> before I got immediate pain when trying with the left shift. >>>> To me left shift is a NO WAY. >>>> esc (top left) would work but I did not have the time to hack Spotter. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Doru >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Stef >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> www.tudorgirba.com >>>>> www.feenk.com >>>>> >>>>> "Reasonable is what we are accustomed with." >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> www.tudorgirba.com >>> www.feenk.com >>> >>> "The coherence of a trip is given by the clearness of the goal." >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> > > -- > www.tudorgirba.com > www.feenk.com > > "Not knowing how to do something is not an argument for how it cannot be > done." > >
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
