-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 972
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
tab_switch_strategy
can act weird when closing tabs created with --keep-focus
#4987
Comments
This is not completely fixed. If I Please try:
Observed Behavior ~ A B C D E F |
If you go through tabs they have been activated so they will show up in |
Perhaps I am confused. Lets walk through the scenario: When creating tabs A-F, if without visiting any other tab, I start closing them right away, just like in the original repro steps, the tabs get closed in this order: ~ A B C D E F. This means the MRU order is the reverse creation order. This is good—I like it. Now the new scenario: I have tabs ~ A B C D E F. Switching to Tab C using I admit this is confusing. I have since set |
Ah OK, this will take care of it
5136270
|
Within my last posted repro steps, if after creating the new tabs and using
Observed Behavior Tab F is selected. Expected Behavior Tab B is selected. |
Describe the bug
If I create tabs using the remote-control command
@ launch --keep-focus
, then closing each tab switches focus in a somewhat confusing order.To Reproduce
Steps to reproduce the behavior:
CTRL+SHIFT+w
and observe the order of the focused tab at each step.Observed Behavior
(The tab with focus is Bold.)
~ A B C D E F
A B C D E F
A B C D E
B C D E
B C D
C D
C
It looks like the focus alternates between the first and the last tab as I close each tab.
The issue here is with the meaning of
previous
when you do not really switch to a tab while creating it.I'd say
--keep-focus
should act as if the user had switched to the tab, so that focused tab should be in the reverse creation order.Environment details
Additional context
Kitty is built from source
master
branch @b569c01b
.I do not really need the fix in my workflow. However, just thought I'd file it anyway.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: