Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add fuzzy-finder-like way of opening documents within the active project #134

Closed
cassidyjames opened this issue Jun 28, 2017 · 11 comments · Fixed by #1393
Closed

Add fuzzy-finder-like way of opening documents within the active project #134

cassidyjames opened this issue Jun 28, 2017 · 11 comments · Fixed by #1393
Labels
Needs Design Waiting for input from the UX team Priority: Wishlist An enhancement or feature request Status: Confirmed Verified by someone other than the reporter

Comments

@cassidyjames
Copy link
Contributor

cassidyjames commented Jun 28, 2017

From Launchpad bug 1547620:

Atom has a great built-in "fuzzy-finder" when you hit Ctrl+T. It opens a crazy-fast search through the open projects' filenames and when you hit enter, it opens that one in a new tab. It's a great way to insanely-quickly jump around in a large project.

I'd love to see something similar in Scratch. :)

Their plugin is here: https://github.com/atom/fuzzy-finder

@cassidyjames cassidyjames added the Priority: Wishlist An enhancement or feature request label Jun 28, 2017
@danirabbit danirabbit changed the title Add fuzzy-finder-like open Add fuzzy-finder-like open [$10] Aug 23, 2019
@cassidyjames cassidyjames added the Status: Confirmed Verified by someone other than the reporter label Oct 3, 2019
@cassidyjames cassidyjames pinned this issue Oct 3, 2019
@Southporter
Copy link

I would be interesting in tackling this one. Couple questions though:

Would this be better as a plugin, or as part of the core code?
Atom has it as a plugin with config options.

Atom tries to use ripGrep under the hood when possible. I've set up vim to use fzf and ag for the searching. Should we have options for which util to use under the hood?
I would default to using find though.

@jeremypw
Copy link
Collaborator

If Code is anything like Files then there are problems assigning a short-cut to a plugin. Maybe better as part of the code under the Scratch.FolderManager namespace?

@dar5hak
Copy link

dar5hak commented Sep 7, 2020

@ssedrick Providing an option to choose a searching util is probably not something that needs to be exposed to the user—not according to the HIG at least. It's both simpler and more user-friendly to pick one that integrates well, and use that.

@CodeforEvolution
Copy link

CodeforEvolution commented Oct 11, 2020

Out of curiosity, is anyone still looking at this issue? If not, I would be willing to take a look into this file search functionality!

@Southporter
Copy link

I haven't been able to get anywhere with this, so if you want to take it, @CodeforEvolution, please do.

@CodeforEvolution
Copy link

CodeforEvolution commented Oct 18, 2020

Cool! In that case, I believe there will be some necessary UI adjustments as a part of this ticket.

Otherwise, here is what I had in mind:

  • I would like to make use of the pre-existing toolbar that drops down for text searches.
  • The toolbar would now have two modes that a user could "toggle" between, using a special toggle switch. (Edit: I hope to have a concept image done soon!):
    1. The toggle switch would lie on the far left of the toolbar.
    2. The toggle switch's knob would have a magnifying glass graphic on it.
    3. The "slots" of the toggle switch would have graphics for each mode: A "bolded T" for text searching, and a "page" for file searching.
    4. When the knob hovers over one of these icons, the icon is highlighted, and the magnifying glass and specific mode icon are "merged"/shown on top of one another.
  • Since "Ctrl+F" currently opens the text search toolbar, I feel that "Ctrl+Shift+F" could be a "logical candidate" to open the toolbar and switch to the file search mode immediately.
  • When a user starts searching for a file, the sidebar on the left could expand slightly, and slowly eliminate entries that don't fit the search parameters that the user has started to type in.

Feel free to give feedback on this idea! (I'll wait on the coding until I have gotten a sufficient amount, just to be safe!)

@dar5hak
Copy link

dar5hak commented Oct 18, 2020

+1 to using CtrlShiftF for the shortcut (unless it conflicts with something else), simply because that's what VS Code users are used to.

@sryze
Copy link
Contributor

sryze commented Oct 30, 2020

IMO Ctrl+P would be more logical as this is the shortcut for fuzzy-searching file names in VSCode, Atom, and Google Chrome / Firefox dev tools; Ctrl+Shift+F makes more sense for finding text across files.

@cassidyjames cassidyjames added the Needs Design Waiting for input from the UX team label Oct 30, 2020
@cassidyjames cassidyjames changed the title Add fuzzy-finder-like open [$10] Add fuzzy-finder-like open Oct 30, 2020
@cassidyjames
Copy link
Contributor Author

Note: I've removed the mentions of a bounty since we have moved away from Bountysource and refunded all bounties as of June.

@jeremypw jeremypw changed the title Add fuzzy-finder-like open Add fuzzy-finder-like way of opening documents within the active project Aug 2, 2023
@colinkiama
Copy link
Member

It's been a while since there's been activity in the existing pull request for this issue.

Would it be okay if a new pull request (created by someone else) was created that includes the changes from #1159?

@jeremypw
Copy link
Collaborator

@colinkiama Yes, as the original person did not respond to my last message I think it is OK to take this over if you wish.

@lenemter lenemter unpinned this issue Jan 12, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Needs Design Waiting for input from the UX team Priority: Wishlist An enhancement or feature request Status: Confirmed Verified by someone other than the reporter
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

7 participants