Hi, Exactly :).
Doru > On Jan 11, 2016, at 6:03 PM, Nicolai Hess <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > 2016-01-11 16:59 GMT+01:00 stepharo <[email protected]>: > Why #s > Senders shortcut is since ages Cmd-n > > #s is not a shortcut, it is a filter. > #s filters for category starting with "s" like "senders" > #i filters for category starting with "i" like "implementers" > > if you add another search category for spotter like "Demo" > you could use #d as a filter for this. > > > > 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 <[email protected]> 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 "Sometimes the best solution is not the best solution."
