Sorry to gripe, but pressing undo after writing a line of code is like trying to walk up a downward moving escalator. I know it's been said before but here is another plea to the steadfast, cooperative developers: at least consider an option to let undo step back word by word instead of character by character (what would be the nicest is to step back in logical "chunks" the same way bbedit does).
thanks, Kumar
i am going to have to second this motion...
it is the ONLY thing that i do not like about this otherwise wonderful program!!
john peele ------------------------------------ rockbeatspaper ------------------------------------
office 336.992.3751 mobile 336.577.8014
On Nov 4, 2004, at 12:41 PM, kumar mcmillan wrote:
Sorry to gripe, but pressing undo after writing a line of code is like trying to walk up a downward moving escalator. I know it's been said before but here is another plea to the steadfast, cooperative developers: at least consider an option to let undo step back word by word instead of character by character (what would be the nicest is to step back in logical "chunks" the same way bbedit does).
thanks, Kumar
_______________________________________________ textmate mailing list textmate@lists.macromates.com http://lists.macromates.com/mailman/listinfo/textmate
[undo char-by-char, by word or in chunks]
I actually prefer character-by-character undo, and Allan does also I think. An option would of course be fine, but I would hate to have it changed without an option to keep the current behaviour.
I would really like to see word or (preferably) chunk based undo.
Having to press undo multiple times or holding it down (in certain circumstances) to reverse the changes of replacing one word with another (complete with typos and deletes - my rubbish typing, I'm afraid) is quite a pain and very slow. Given that TM is so good at speeding up code entry (with snippets, etc.) in so many other areas, it would be great if this aspect could be quicker (I often enter experimental lines of code in different places and rely on undo to reverse them if I'm not happy).
I can understand that there may be situations (or perhaps languages) that character by character delete would be useful, but for me I almost always find I want to undo chunks of typing. If I want to undo individual characters the delete key is more handy or I can typeover those characters (not forgetting that chunk based undo would in any case only undo individual characters if entered as a separate chunk). Personally I can't think of any real world examples where character by character undo is more useful than intelligent chunk based undo.
Just my tuppence worth! James
On 4 Nov 2004, at 10:07, Sune Foldager wrote:
[undo char-by-char, by word or in chunks]
I actually prefer character-by-character undo, and Allan does also I think. An option would of course be fine, but I would hate to have it changed without an option to keep the current behaviour.
-- Sune.
textmate mailing list textmate@lists.macromates.com http://lists.macromates.com/mailman/listinfo/textmate
What do you get with char-by-char undo that you don't already have with the delete key?
I suspect that chunk-based undo as default would make a far better first impression, given that it's the way everything else does it.
It just feels broken at the moment.
Chris
On Nov 4, 2004, at 10:07 AM, Sune Foldager wrote:
[undo char-by-char, by word or in chunks]
I actually prefer character-by-character undo, and Allan does also I think. An option would of course be fine, but I would hate to have it changed without an option to keep the current behaviour.
-- Sune.
textmate mailing list textmate@lists.macromates.com http://lists.macromates.com/mailman/listinfo/textmate
On 4. Nov 2004, at 22:04, Chris Thomas wrote:
What do you get with char-by-char undo that you don't already have with the delete key?
I have lost intermediate edits with the chunk undo, and the char-by-char is always predictable to me, chunk undo isn't (although if I code it myself, it'll probably be more transparent to me at least ;) ). Also, I generally tend to only undo a few edits, not a chunk, you say I can use the delete key, but I undo many other actions than just typing letters -- hitting cmd-z is just undo what I just did (be it toggle the case of a letter, deleting a letter, changing indent etc.), with chunk-undo this only works half the time.
I suspect that chunk-based undo as default would make a far better first impression, given that it's the way everything else does it.
Based on the comments I've read, this seems to be a true assessment. But it'll have to wait some more, I have like 60 things to “change” before 1.1, and this isn't what I consider the most serious flaw ATM ;)
Kind regards Allan
On 05/11/2004, at 8:47 AM, Allan Odgaard wrote:
On 4. Nov 2004, at 22:04, Chris Thomas wrote:
What do you get with char-by-char undo that you don't already have with the delete key?
I have lost intermediate edits with the chunk undo, and the char-by-char is always predictable to me, chunk undo isn't (although if I code it myself, it'll probably be more transparent to me at least ;) ). Also, I generally tend to only undo a few edits, not a chunk, you say I can use the delete key, but I undo many other actions than just typing letters -- hitting cmd-z is just undo what I just did (be it toggle the case of a letter, deleting a letter, changing indent etc.), with chunk-undo this only works half the time.
Perhaps Cmd-Ctl-Z for a "chunk undo" can be added to the to-do for a future version, which will shut everyone up :)
Justin
On 11/4/04 10:07, "Sune Foldager" cryo@diku.dk wrote:
[undo char-by-char, by word or in chunks]
I actually prefer character-by-character undo, and Allan does also I think. An option would of course be fine, but I would hate to have it changed without an option to keep the current behaviour.
In a graphics application (Photoshop Elements), there's Undo, Step Forward, and Step Backwards.
In my limited use of PE, I've found Undo is like a character by character undo. Step Backwards is chunk based undo.
Step Backwards undoes a group of pen strokes, or actions. Like a group of brush strokes.
Undo reverts one of the brush strokes.
I hope y'all can understand what I'm trying to explain.
Could something similar be done in TM?
On 5. nov 2004, at 3:06, R. Strachan wrote:
In a graphics application (Photoshop Elements), there's Undo, Step Forward, and Step Backwards. In my limited use of PE, I've found Undo is like a character by character undo. Step Backwards is chunk based undo. Step Backwards undoes a group of pen strokes, or actions. Like a group of brush strokes.
Undo reverts one of the brush strokes. I hope y'all can understand what I'm trying to explain. Could something similar be done in TM?
Sounds complicated... I like better that both discrete (like it is now) and block undo/redo will be available for instance on cmd-z and cmd-opt-z for undo. Then, which one binds to what should be a preferences setting. I would like cmd-z to be discrete undo; I imagine most others would like it the other way around.
On 11/4/04 19:04, "Sune Foldager" cryo@diku.dk wrote:
On 5. nov 2004, at 3:06, R. Strachan wrote:
In a graphics application (Photoshop Elements), there's Undo, Step Forward, and Step Backwards. In my limited use of PE, I've found Undo is like a character by character undo. Step Backwards is chunk based undo. Step Backwards undoes a group of pen strokes, or actions. Like a group of brush strokes.
Undo reverts one of the brush strokes. I hope y'all can understand what I'm trying to explain. Could something similar be done in TM?
Sounds complicated... I like better that both discrete (like it is now) and block undo/redo will be available for instance on cmd-z and cmd-opt-z for undo. Then, which one binds to what should be a preferences setting. I would like cmd-z to be discrete undo; I imagine most others would like it the other way around.
My descriptions always sound more complicated than actual use :-)
How you imagine what others would like is how PE has it.
Step Forward is cmd-y
Step Backward is cmd-z
Undo is cmd-option-z
If the option to swap the key combos were available, it might make things easier for many people but I also think that too many customizations can get in the way of functionality.
We already have Cmd-z to step back through the undo stack and Cmd-Shift-z to move forward through it so I don't understand the difference. For me the issue is a matter of preference regarding block vs. character based granularity i.e. the points in the stack you move back or forwards to.
Personally I generally prefer the block-based version for speed and because every other text editing app for the OS X GUI works this way (so I guess I'm used to it). I can understand the benefits in certain circumstances for character based undo, but find it's too granular for me most of the time. I would like to see undo work the same as the other apps (i.e. block based) for speed and intuitiveness (i.e. expected behaviour) but switch to a more fine grained approach with an additional modifier (Alt or Ctrl). There is little danger of losing stuff with the block approach as you can always move forward through the re-do stack if you've gone too far (and then switch to a fine grained approach to move back slowly if necessary).
I can understand some others might want to have the default being character based (though expect the majority to prefer the block approach) so perhaps we can have a mode-toggle or a preference to keep us all happy.
On 4 Nov 2004, at 19:38, R. Strachan wrote:
On 11/4/04 19:04, "Sune Foldager" cryo@diku.dk wrote:
On 5. nov 2004, at 3:06, R. Strachan wrote:
In a graphics application (Photoshop Elements), there's Undo, Step Forward, and Step Backwards. In my limited use of PE, I've found Undo is like a character by character undo. Step Backwards is chunk based undo. Step Backwards undoes a group of pen strokes, or actions. Like a group of brush strokes.
Undo reverts one of the brush strokes. I hope y'all can understand what I'm trying to explain. Could something similar be done in TM?
Sounds complicated... I like better that both discrete (like it is now) and block undo/redo will be available for instance on cmd-z and cmd-opt-z for undo. Then, which one binds to what should be a preferences setting. I would like cmd-z to be discrete undo; I imagine most others would like it the other way around.
My descriptions always sound more complicated than actual use :-)
How you imagine what others would like is how PE has it.
Step Forward is cmd-y
Step Backward is cmd-z
Undo is cmd-option-z
If the option to swap the key combos were available, it might make things easier for many people but I also think that too many customizations can get in the way of functionality.
-- Mr. Shannon Strachan Y2K XL1200S Black Bart Auburn, CA
textmate mailing list textmate@lists.macromates.com http://lists.macromates.com/mailman/listinfo/textmate
Allow the user to decide which works best for him/her, with character AND block based editing to exist side by side.
My explanation gave an example with an existing application, and references for those who don't use 'that' application.
-
Allan Odgaard -
Chris Thomas -
James Andrews -
John Peele [*] Arrival 5 Design -
Justin French -
kumar mcmillan -
R. Strachan -
Sune Foldager