Proof tree filters not applied correctly

[WolframPfeifer]

Description

The filters in the proof tree ("Hide Intermediate Proofsteps" etc.) are not applied correctly, at least in the case of a freshly started proof.

Reproducible

always

Steps to reproduce

1. Start any proof and apply some rules or macros to it.
2. Select "Hide Intermediate Proofsteps" in the proof tree settings (gear wheel).

I would expect that the intermediate proof steps are filtered out. However, the proof tree stays as it is (no filters applied).
Furthermore, if the menu is opened again, the checkbox is not ticked.

Additional information

• By bisecting, I found the first bad commit: 3ab8750.
• The problem seems to have something to do with the focus: At least in my testing, it only happened in freshly started proofs. If multiple proofs are present, after switching between them, the filters work fine.

[WolframPfeifer]

@mi-ki I think this is the issue you mentioned to me yesterday, right?

[WolframPfeifer]

@unp1 The commit that introduced this problem is 3ab8750. It seems that you tried to do some refactoring here ...

[unp1]

Will look into it (but first next week)

[unp1]

See PR #3368.

The root cause was not the commit itself, but it unearthed an inconsistency between two places where node selections are stored.

[unp1]

We might think about removing the additional selection storage from the model and instead have a wrapper record like

ProofTreeViewState(GUIProofTreeModel model, TreePath selectionPath, Filter[] activeFilters)

and then storing this record in the hashmap when switching proofs.

This change would avoid accidental usage of the selection stored in the model and it would allow us to have proof local filter settings. But that would change current behavior and we would need to be fine with it. The current PR just restores previous behavior.

[unp1]

See PR #3369 for an implementation of the suggestion. It builds on top of PR #3368

[mi-ki]

@mi-ki I think this is the issue you mentioned to me yesterday, right?

@WolframPfeifer Yes, you are right, thanks for looking into it!

[unp1]

Brief report on status of PR #3368 and #3369.

Both PRs contain the same refactorings as well as the (unrelated) bugfixes

• for updating the sequentview when pretty printing options are modified
• for a NullPointerException that occurred when closing the Proof Obligation Browser via Cancel when no proof (at all) was loaded in the GUI.
• reduce updates of sequent view when changing view settings: changing a view setting propagated a PropertyChangeEvent causing unrelated properties to trigger their own redraw update just in case

#3369 changes proof tree filters to proof local filters and #3368 does not

Both are finished from my side (of course, feedback from code reviews will be incorporated). The semantics to be used is up for discussion, but as @WolframPfeifer prefers and has actual use cases for #3368, we might want to stay with that semantics and not too optimize for some imaginery unknown user :-)