> On 12 Jan 2016, at 09:19, Christophe Demarey <christophe.dema...@inria.fr> > wrote: > > 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.
Yes, and YES the exact match problem must be fixed (and has been reported before) - it is one of the most frustrating issue with both searching and completion. The shortest closest match must always come first. > 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." >> >> >
