Hello, I'm a bit late (I had a lot of work last week), but here is my answer. =)
> I think Florian addressed this one -- up/down are used for history, leaving > just > tab/shift-tab for completion selection. I think this mirrors what people are > used to from a shell. > > I find I use tab for completion, alt-p/n for history, and never touch those > annoying arrow keys :) Yes, I agree that's the best, and now I will get used to it. > How about <ctrl+w> to delete the last word? It just deletes everything if it's an URL or something like seem to be a word. > So something like vim's completeopt=longest? That is, complete the longest > substring of the available completions? I could see this being useful for > things > like settings. It seems nearly useless for URL's though. I almost never type > `:open http://`, but without that, you wouldn't be matching anything by a > prefix > plus you'd miss out on https://, ect. I'm not sure I'd want to implement > different completion behaviors for different completion types, but it isn't a > bad suggestion. I only said it because I felt I was missing something like that, but they were settings sections, and I agree with how it's done now (see next answer). > I was one of the ones who pushed for this change. I could never seem to > remember > what section a given option belonged in. Is "User-Agent" general or network? > What about "private-browsing"? I frequently had to try several sections. Now I > just type ":set user_agent" and it completes to "content.headers.user_agent". Yes, yes, I completely agree on that, I had to try several sections as well to find things. The point is that I was missing that and I didn't realise, but I prefer it as it is right now. > FWIW, there is a more detailed explanation here: > https://github.com/qutebrowser/qutebrowser/blob/master/doc/help/configuring.asciidoc#migrating-older-configurations Ah, great, thanks. =) > Sorry, that was poorly worded on my part, I wasn't blaming you. That was more > of a general statement. OK. =) > Yes - if you filter for ! in e.g. the setting value completion or whatever, > you > wouldn't expect qutebrowser to filter for %21. But the point is that it doesn't matter as there won't be strings like that in settings, don't you think? > Kind of - sections just don't exist anymore, because they made both the code > and using :set (as you needed to know what section something was in) more > complicated. > > That does indeed mean qute://settings is a bit less organized now, but I'm not > sure what to do about that. Well, they could be split using the parts between full stops, but I think it's not worth it. By the way, I also find the browser more slow when scrolling, is that due to qtwebengine as well? I also have 2 issues more: - Sometimes, when I use hints to go to a form box to fill it, it doesn't enter insert mode (and if I enter insert mode manually with "i", nothing is written as I type). I will find a concrete example in a page (I forgot to write it down when it happened) and send it, so you can skip this by now until I find a place to reproduce it. - Randomly, qutebrowser seems to get stuck but it's not, it's only the graphical part. For example, if I open a new tab (it should focus on it as that's the usual case), I keep seeing the same in the window (except that I can see that page title is different, as if I were on the new tab); I can even click on other tabs and see that page title changes, but not the content or tabs bar, those are frozen, even though I can click on them and I can see that they're interacting. If I minimise the window and then restore it, everything is fixed; BUT sometimes, before I can minimise it, it gets all graphics in the computer stucked and I see a notification like "desktop effects were restored due to a graphic problem" (I'm using plasma on Arch). I guess this will be hard to debug, so if I can help in any way, I'm willing to do it. Regards, José Alberto On miércoles, 18 de octubre de 2017 13:57:44 (CEST) Ryan Roden-Corrent wrote: > Hi José! > > Thanks for the great email, there's lots of clear, constructive feedback here. > > > Default behaviour for moving between completions is tab or shift-tab. I know > > that I can make arrow keys also do the job in settings, but what is the > > point > > of having that disabled by default now? > > I think Florian addressed this one -- up/down are used for history, leaving > just > tab/shift-tab for completion selection. I think this mirrors what people are > used to from a shell. > > I find I use tab for completion, alt-p/n for history, and never touch those > annoying arrow keys :) > > > Completion is sometimes sorted differently. For example, when I wanted to > > clear downloads, I used to write ":clear" and hit tab, the two results were > > download-clear > > history-clear > > and they were alphabetically sorted. Now, the completions for that are > > search > > history-clear > > download-clear > > config-clear > > and I cannot see what the pattern is, but it's not alphabetically in command > > or command description, for sure. Why is this now happening? > > I'm calling this a bug. They are sorted initially but we lose sorting when you > filter. I created https://github.com/qutebrowser/qutebrowser/issues/3156 to > track. > > > Not being able to go back to original. I think it could be useful to undo > > completion, for example, writing something, hitting tab (or down arrow) and > > then shift-tab (or up arrow). When I hit tab accidentally I have to start > > from > > scratch. > > How about <ctrl+w> to delete the last word? > > > Taking into account substitutions in urls. For example, if I want to > > find an url that contained a bang, I cannot find it using ":open !" > > because that won't give any result as ! was changed to %21 in the url. > > This depends on how you got to the url. If I navigate to example.com/foo!bar, > that exact string will show up in my completions, and will show up with > ":open !". If I navigate explicitly to example.com/foo%21bar, then we will not > automatically decode it. I think maybe we could with QURL.FullyDecoded? If so, > do we want to? Florian? > > > Completion until next difference: when I write ":set col" and hit tab, > > it'd be nice if it completed to color before completing directly to > > colors.completion.category.bg. > > So something like vim's completeopt=longest? That is, complete the longest > substring of the available completions? I could see this being useful for > things > like settings. It seems nearly useless for URL's though. I almost never type > `:open http://`, but without that, you wouldn't be matching anything by a > prefix > plus you'd miss out on https://, ect. I'm not sure I'd want to implement > different completion behaviors for different completion types, but it isn't a > bad suggestion. > > > The point is that settings were split in sections before, so I could hit tab > > step by step to complete, and that was (I think) what I was missing > > subconsciously. > > I was one of the ones who pushed for this change. I could never seem to > remember > what section a given option belonged in. Is "User-Agent" general or network? > What about "private-browsing"? I frequently had to try several sections. Now I > just type ":set user_agent" and it completes to "content.headers.user_agent". > > > Overall, I'm not feeling bad about the update and I'd like to thank > > Florian and all the contributors for all the work you've done. =) > > Thank YOU for writing this email. We can't fix things we don't know about :) > > - Ryan (rcorre) > > On Wed 10/18/17 06:32AM, Florian Bruhin wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 08:39:38PM +0000, José Alberto Orejuela García > > wrote: > > > > That being said, I had no idea how many people use arrow keys to > > > > navigate > > > > through the completion, and I changed it because a lot of people > > > > expected > > > > up/down to go through the history. > > > > > > Yes, I also liked it, the point is that I didn't know it was that. Maybe > > > you > > > put it in the changelog and I missed that part (I usually read them), > > > sorry. > > > =P > > > > I did indeed forget to put it in the original changelog and then added it a > > bit > > later, so that might be me to blame ;-) > > > > FWIW, there is a more detailed explanation here: > > https://github.com/qutebrowser/qutebrowser/blob/master/doc/help/configuring.asciidoc#migrating-older-configurations > > > > > > Can't please everyone I guess, but I'm tired of the bikeshedding[1] :P > > > > > > > > [1] https://shed.bike/ > > > > > > I was only asking for understanding, not trying to demand anything. I'm > > > sorry > > > about making you feel like that. > > > > Sorry, that was poorly worded on my part, I wasn't blaming you. That was > > more > > of a general statement. > > > > > > Also, it introduces special completion matching only applicable to > > > > :open, which > > > > is another thing I'd like to avoid. > > > > > > You could implement it everywhere, do you thing it will lead to problems > > > with > > > other commands? > > > > Yes - if you filter for ! in e.g. the setting value completion or whatever, > > you > > wouldn't expect qutebrowser to filter for %21. > > > > > > > - Completion until next difference: when I write ":set col" and hit > > > > > tab, it'd > > > > > be nice if it completed to color before completing directly to > > > > > colors.completion.category.bg. This is certainly the feature that I > > > > > see > > > > > hardest to being useful given a proper implementation, because > > > > > normally there > > > > > could be a lot of partial different coincidences, for example typing > > > > > "duckduck" maybe it should be changed to duckduckgo based on urls or > > > > > DuckDuckGo based on page titles. It's also the thing I miss the least > > > > > of > > > > > these three. > > > > > > > > I can see how that'd be useful for settings, but again, this would > > > > introduce > > > > special handling for one particular completion. > > > > > > Yes, I have just realised why I was thinking about that. The point is that > > > settings were split in sections before, so I could hit tab step by step to > > > complete, and that was (I think) what I was missing subconsciously. > > > > > > Also, that led to a qute://settings page split in sections, tidier than > > > the > > > new one (it's a minor thing, of course). Is that intentional? > > > > Kind of - sections just don't exist anymore, because they made both the code > > and using :set (as you needed to know what section something was in) more > > complicated. > > > > That does indeed mean qute://settings is a bit less organized now, but I'm > > not > > sure what to do about that. > > > > Florian > > > >
