You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I have the following in my rc file: (note that the formats are identical)
set songformat {%a - %b - %n.%t}|{%f}$E$R $H[$H%l$H]$H
set libraryformat {%a - %b - %n.%t}|{%f}$E$R $H[$H%l$H]$H
Then what happens is that in my "browse" window, tracks that are numbered 1, 2, ..., 9, 10, 11, appear like so:
Artist - Album - 1.First track
Artist - Album - 10.Tenth track
Artist - Album - 11.Eleventh track
Artist - Album - 2.Second track
.
.
.
Artist - Album - 9.Ninth track
However if I set
set sort library
Then the tracks appear in the right order:
Artist - Album - 1.First track
Artist - Album - 2.Second track
.
.
.
Artist - Album - 9.Ninth track
Artist - Album - 10.Tenth track
Artist - Album - 11.Eleventh track
I thought the default is that sort is set to "format", which is exactly the same as with the libraryformat in my rc. So, wouldn't it be the expected behaviour that the default should result the tracks to show as in the second case?
Thanks.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
The issue is that the "format" search option is purely a dumb alphabetical sort on the format string. The library sort option however is not based on the library's format string but is based upon the order of the song library itself which is sorted with understanding that track number comes before title etc. The "libraryformat" option purely controls the printing, not sorting. What is really needed is a proper sort that understands that context for the browse window, or simply a print that puts a leading "0" on the track numbers.
It's definitely not really the intended behaviour but i guess it's somewhat sort of expected. I'll see what I can do.
Ah, okay, I see what the problem is. Printing a leading zero on the track number can also be tricky in the (admittedly very rare) case of albums with more than 100 tracks, though.
In any case, personally I put "set sort library" and I'm happy, I just wanted to bring it to your attention. Thanks again.
Hi,
First thanks for this great program, I love it.
I have the following in my rc file: (note that the formats are identical)
Then what happens is that in my "browse" window, tracks that are numbered 1, 2, ..., 9, 10, 11, appear like so:
However if I set
Then the tracks appear in the right order:
I thought the default is that sort is set to "format", which is exactly the same as with the libraryformat in my rc. So, wouldn't it be the expected behaviour that the default should result the tracks to show as in the second case?
Thanks.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: