Op vrijdag 13 maart 2020 01:30:23 CET schreef Jean Laroche:
> Well it's finally working. I cleaned everything and rebuilt everything,
> and things are OK now. I should have started with that. :(
> Thanks for the help though!
>
Glad you got it working.
I'm the one to usually bring this up, so I'll do so again:
Before adding options always think very hard for ways to avoid that.
I understand you don't want to replace the old behavior with your new behavior
unconditionally.
I agree.
However I also think they are not necessarily mutually exclusive. If you start
from the existing
situation and adapt it slightly, I think both use cases can be served in one
single search method.
Current search behavior will always start searching from the first character of
the top level
account. Change this to fully search each (sub-)account's name instead and I
think we have
both behaviors combined. Typing the account separator can still auto-complete
the current
selection up until the end of the matched account part and subsequent typing
continues
searching in child account names of the account selected so far.
An example may help:
Imagine we have the following account tree:
Assets:Cash
Assets:Bank
Income:Salary
Expenses:Bets
Expenses:Bets:Blue
Typing 'et' will filter the list of accounts to show to
Assets:Cash
Assets:Bank
Expenses:Bets
Expenses:Bets:Blue
Subsequently typing ":" will autocomplete 'et' to 'ets:' and reduce the list to
Assets:Cash
Assets:Bank
Expenses:Bets:Blue
(Expenses:Bets itself is a final match while we ask for subaccounts with the
":" so it's now
excluded)
>From here we can consider two possible behaviors for further matching:
- old style from-left-to-right
- new style full text match on subaccount
For old style the user now has to continue typing "Ba" or "Bl" to further
filter on either Bank or
Blue.
Continuing to type "Ba" will further reduce the list to
Assets:Bank
Whereas typing "Bl" would reduce it to
Expenses:Bets:Blue
I would though instead try to implement full text match on subaccount allowing
the user to do
as in the old style but also
Type "u" to reduce the list to
Expenses:Bets:Blue
("Bank" has no 'u' in it)
I think the internal logic for this is not that much more complicated than our
current search
implementation. The challenge though is likely how to represent this in the
text field the user is
typing in. That is how to visually represent which bits of text were actually
typed by the user
and which bits are autofilled.
Regards,
Geert
_______________________________________________
gnucash-devel mailing list
gnucash-devel@gnucash.org
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
