History thinning - why not for Alt-Left?

English support forum

Moderators: sheep, Hacker, Stefan2, white

Post Reply
User avatar
Hacker
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 11511
Joined: 2003-02-06, 14:56 UTC
Location: Bratislava, Slovakia

History thinning - why not for Alt-Left?

Post by *Hacker »

Hi,
I was thinking the thinning did not work for me when I found this in history.txt:
16.10.19 Release Total Commander 9.50 beta 1
14.07.19 Added: Directory history thinning: Keep normal history (Alt+Left/Right arrow) unchanged, only apply to history menu (Alt+Down arrow) (32/64)
What is the reasoning behind not applying history thinning to Alt-Left? Would it be considered too confusing?

TIA
Roman
Mal angenommen, du drückst Strg+F, wählst die FTP-Verbindung (mit gespeichertem Passwort), klickst aber nicht auf Verbinden, sondern fällst tot um.

User avatar
ghisler(Author)
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 39081
Joined: 2003-02-04, 09:46 UTC
Location: Switzerland
Contact:

Re: History thinning - why not for Alt-Left?

Post by *ghisler(Author) »

When I first implemented thinning, I only kept the "important" directories in the history. This turned out to be unusable in every day work. For example, when you went one directory too far up, you couldn't simply return to the previous directory because it wasn't in the list. Therefore I limit the thinning to the history list now, and still allow to view the entire list with Alt+Shift+Cursor down.
Author of Total Commander
http://www.ghisler.com

User avatar
Hacker
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 11511
Joined: 2003-02-06, 14:56 UTC
Location: Bratislava, Slovakia

Re: History thinning - why not for Alt-Left?

Post by *Hacker »

Christian,
Well, maybe you are right. Difficult to have an opinion without trying :D

Roman
Mal angenommen, du drückst Strg+F, wählst die FTP-Verbindung (mit gespeichertem Passwort), klickst aber nicht auf Verbinden, sondern fällst tot um.

Post Reply