nano-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Nano-devel] feedback on long searches, and subtler spell checking


From: Benno Schulenberg
Subject: [Nano-devel] feedback on long searches, and subtler spell checking
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2016 13:01:33 +0100

Hi all,

When editing a huge file and searching for something that
doesn't occur in the file or is a /long/ way away, the cursor
just sits there blinking and there is no indication that nano
is frantically busy searching through the thousands of lines.
So the first proposed patch adds some feedback: when the search
takes (on average) longer than half a second, a message is shown
on the statusbar: "Searching..."  This also turns the cursor off,
making it still clearer that nano is not in a state where the
user can type anything (other than Cancel).  When the search
wraps, the (re)printing of this message is a bit delayed, to
give the user time to see and absorb it.


Second.  When using the internal spell checker to correct
misspellings, and you've edited a replacement, nano will
ask for every occurrence of the misspelled word whether
to replace it or not.  That is fine.  But when you press
Cancel, it stops and finishes the entire spell checking!
I think it should continue with the next word, and only
abort the checking upon a second Cancel.

You may say that this diverges from the behavior of Pico.
But there are already several differences with Pico:
1) nano goes through the misspelled words alphabetically,
Pico in order of occurrence;
2) when having edited a replacement, Pico replaces the
first occurrence immediately, nano asks for confirmation
also for the first one;
3) when answering No to the question whether to replace
an occurrence, Pico stops the replacing and goes to the
next misspelled word, nano just steps to the next instance
and asks the question again.

So... in order to achieve the same skip-rest-and-goto-next
behavior that Pico exhibits when typing N, I think nano
should do that when typing Cancel.  Attached second patch
(dead simple) implements that.

Opinions?
Okay to apply?

Benno

-- 
http://www.fastmail.com - mmm... Fastmail...

Attachment: still-searching.patch
Description: Text Data

Attachment: allow-to-just-stop-replacing.patch
Description: Text Data


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]