New package: fzy

[Vouivre]

Hello,

I use the fuzzy finder fzywhich is more lightweight than fzfand written in C. The code
is also much shorter than fzf.

The official version is at

https://github.com/jhawthorn/fzy

It's not very active at the moment. I need the feature with multi-selection, which is not implemented in
the official repository. But there is a PR which add this feature as well as other features:

jhawthorn/fzy#170

The repository of the user who submitted the patch:

https://github.com/leo-arch/fzy

I could package fzy as I use it. Of if somebody else want to create it, no problem.

As I'm only interested by the version with multi-selection, what do you think about packaging the version of
leo-arch which is not the official one ? Or the official version with a patch with all added features of leo-arch ?

[dilyn-corner]

Probably prefer upstream with a patch file.  Aug 24, 2022, 11:07 AM by ***@***.***:

…

Hello, I use the fuzzy finder > fzy> which is more lightweight than > fzf> and written in C. The code is also much shorter than > fzf> . The official version is at https://github.com/jhawthorn/fzy It's not very active at the moment. I need the feature with multi-selection, which is not implemented in the official repository. But there is a PR which add this feature as well as other features: jhawthorn/fzy#170 <jhawthorn/fzy#170> The repository of the user who submitted the patch: https://github.com/leo-arch/fzy I could package > fzy> as I use it. Of if somebody else want to create it, no problem. As I'm only interested by the version with multi-selection, what do you think about packaging the version of leo-arch which is not the official one ? Or the official version with a patch with all added features of leo-arch ? — Reply to this email directly, > view it on GitHub <#1211>> , or > unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AEVM3SMXVN7OBY5A2YHQWP3V2Y3CXANCNFSM57PWXQAQ>> . You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.> Message ID: > <kiss-community/community/issues/1211> @> github> .> com>

[Vouivre]

Ok, it's ready, I'll wait the opinion of another user before creating a PR.

[hovercats]

@dilyn-corner fzy is partially compatible with ytfzf, and probably more compatible with the afforementioned features patched in.

would we be interested in patching ytfzf to be used with fzy instead?
I personally already do this, just without the afforementioned features, as I dont personally need them.

or perhaps even replacing fzf altogether.

edit: fix tag

[Vouivre]

@hovercats: I like the idea to replace fzf with fzy. A feature fzfhas and not fzy is the preview function.
I don't really use it at the moment, but I have it in mind. It could be useful. So I wouldn't drop fzf for fzy.

I have done another test with another patch, for me the above patch is enough. I let you create the PR.

For patching ytfzf as you mentionned we should wait the opinion of users of ytfzf and @dilyn-corner .
For me there would be no problem to replace. But instead I could ask the dev of ytfzf if it could be possible for the user to choose between fzfand fzyin the config file.

[hovercats]

@hovercats: I like the idea to replace fzf with fzy. A feature fzfhas and not fzy is the preview function. I don't really use it at the moment, but I have it in mind. It could be useful. So I wouldn't drop fzf for fzy.

if you really want/need fzf's extra features, stick with fzf. if youre happy with could ofcourse package fzy with the appropriate patch, to add the afforementioned features.

I have done another test with another patch, for me the above patch is enough. I let you create the PR.

link the patch you wish to use, and ill create a pr for it once im back on my laptop.

For patching ytfzf as you mentionned we should wait the opinion of users of ytfzf and @dilyn-corner . For me there would be no problem to replace. But instead I could ask the dev of ytfzf if it could be possible for the user to choose between fzfand fzyin the config file.

I doubt the maintainer of ytfzf is interested in doing this, as itll likely complicate the script further.
if we wish to switch out fzf for fzy and patch ytfzf, a new issue should probably be created, as its 2 separate things.

[Vouivre]

if you really want/need fzf's extra features, stick with fzf. if youre happy with could ofcourse package fzy with the appropriate patch, to add the afforementioned features.

No, I keep only one extra feature in mind. For the moment I'll switch completely to fzy.

I have done another test with another patch, for me the above patch is enough. I let you create the PR.

link the patch you wish to use, and ill create a pr for it once im back on my laptop.

jhawthorn/fzy#170

For patching ytfzf as you mentionned we should wait the opinion of users of ytfzf and @dilyn-corner . For me there would be no problem to replace. But instead I could ask the dev of ytfzf if it could be possible for the user to choose between fzfand fzyin the config file.

I doubt the maintainer of ytfzf is interested in doing this, as itll likely complicate the script further. if we wish to switch out fzf for fzy and patch ytfzf, a new issue should probably be created, as its 2 separate things.

I had a look at ytfzfand I'm convinced the maintainer won't make this change. To use ytfzfwith fzy
you need to add in conf.sh

external_menu(){
                  fzy 
}

and then call ytfzf with:

$ ytfzf -D

So I think we could forget about the second issue.