Add Assembly column to search results #1690
Conversation
|
In the case #1694 is merged as well, what do you think we should do regarding this new column? When searching for resources, the "location" is the assembly. We can keep Location for the shared assembly name (without version, etc.) and have this new column for the full assembly name. Would that be ok ? |
|
Right, well the way I implemented resource search it looks for files inside .resources files too which then goes into the Location column:
It's trickier with assembly search, for which I just put the path in the Location column:
Any of that sounds reasonable? |
|
Ah the funny thing is that we implemented both the same "search for resources" feature two days apart: Yours: miloush@8f89457 |
|
Indeed. Interesting that you decided to split the search results and switch on their type while I decided to split the search strategy and take advantage of the switch in I don't mind what you go for, I just have almost 6000 assemblies loaded in the list and needed to search for a baml component mentioned in a source code, hence searching inside .resources files was a big help for me. |
|
So... which one should I merge first? :) |
|
As far as this PR goes I believe we agreed with @sailro that the Assembly column shows full assembly name, and hence this can be merged irrelevant of the other discussions. Since resource search strategy either splits the strategy or the result, it might be easier to merge this one first as it precedes such changes in both. |
|
@miloush are we going to see a PR for miloush@2fa0262 as well? |
|
Sure happy to create one but the implementation will differ depending on the result vs. strategy split. Is there a preference which way to go? |
|
Thank you for the contribution! I think we can continue the discussion about these features on the other pull request. |
Implements #1544