Do not affect extension's DOT with search/replace in MR-tool

[fredscal]

Now, none of these possible improvements is crucial, but they would make life simpler (that is: operation faster)


- After renaming, the result column could be transfered to the left column so that you can work on on the same files again without having to exit the tool, reselect the files and open the tool again.

- After renaming, the parameter fields could be reset (with a 'reset' button, or an 'auto-reset' checkbox, or both, for example).

- The default amount of counter digits should be 2 or 3 instead of one.

- There should be a way to avoid replacing the extension's dot character when replacing dots in a filename.

- There could be two different uppercase/lowercase fields: one for the name, the other for the extension. (this would help getting all extensions lowercase, for example)

[icfu]

1) Press F5 or the left icon at the bottom to reload.
2) Press F2 and choose "<default>".
3) MRT remembers the last template, so just create one with two digits.
4) Enter [L][E] in extension field.

Icfu

[fredscal]

Waw!

I guess i've overlooked most of that great software's possibilities. And i've been using it for 10 years. Frightening...

1) It makes sense, kindof, to reload with F5. But is there a panel button associated ? Not that i'd be complaining if there weren't... but at least i'd know i'm not blind

2) & 3) i'm not sure these solutions are 100% efficient when combined, but ok. (efficiency = lowest possible amount of keystrokes or clicks). Or can i modify the "default" setting ?

4) Great! Did i have a chance to find that out by myself ? (Oh, right, RTFM, but i haven't read any FM in my life so... I prefer the warm human feeling of bothering you guys )... and of course [E] works too, what a wonderful world.

[icfu]

1) Panel button? Button is at the bottom, like I said...
2 & 3) True, not very efficient. Nope, no way to adjust the default setting. Has been requested and successfully ignored by the master of ceremonies.
4) Pressing F1 is always a good idea as it is context-sensitive. Although the TC manual isn't really what I would call a prototype of a great help file, it can be used for basic purposes, like full text search. There also is a CHM version:
https://plugins.ghisler.com/help/totalcmd702_eng.zip

Icfu

[fredscal]

Fine. I'll try to discipline myself to press that F1 key (i must be blocked or something... almost never pressed it in any soft since Win95)

I suppose i should have posted this in the english forum before trying to make suggestions

[eugensyl]

1) Press F5 or the left icon at the bottom to reload.
2) Press F2 and choose "<default>".
3) MRT remembers the last template, so just create one with two digits.
4) Enter [L][E] in extension field.

Icfu

Sorry.
4 is in fact 5!

My suggest for 4 is made in two steps:
- Find & Replace [DOT] with what you want (for example double dot)
- Find & Replace [DOUBLE DOT] with nothing and in extension field put .[E]

Very good for Mp3...

[fredscal]

- There should be a way to avoid replacing the extension's dot character when replacing dots in a filename.

- Find & Replace [DOT] with what you want (for example double dot)
- Find & Replace [DOUBLE DOT] with nothing and in extension field put .[E]

Yes that's what i do, but it seems a tedious workaround, quite unbecoming of an efficient tool such as TC.

Moreover, the extension's dot is technically not part of the filename, it is not saved within the filesystem, and is merely a convention to mark the separation between basename and extension. TC doesn't even display it in its original detailed view.

(eugensyl: works great for videos too )

[eugensyl]

- There should be a way to avoid replacing the extension's dot character when replacing dots in a filename.

- Find & Replace [DOT] with what you want (for example double dot)
- Find & Replace [DOUBLE DOT] with nothing and in extension field put .[E]

Yes that's what i do, but it seems a tedious workaround, quite unbecoming of an efficient tool such as TC.

Moreover, the extension's dot is technically not part of the filename, it is not saved within the filesystem, and is merely a convention to mark the separation between basename and extension. TC doesn't even display it in its original detailed view.

(eugensyl: works great for videos too )

You have all right!
Even into help file it is this workaround: "The reason why the two fields are separated is to prevent the accidental removal of file extensions, which would remove the association of files with a certain program.". Keep in mind this.

I think it's a good point do not remove DOT even in such case as you have mentioned. Just the last DOT is, in fact, the separator between name and extension.

[fredscal]

@Ghisler:

So how about search/replace not affecting the dot separating extension from base name in MR tool ? Or give us the choice.


(eugen: I have now renamed this thread to stress this one suggestion of mine that you have outlined, and which showed to be the only valid one)

[StatusQuo]

search/replace not affecting the dot separating extension from base name

Basically: Support.

But unfortunately there are different opinions (and function behaviours) about which dot separates the extension from the name:

• http://ghisler.ch/board/viewtopic.php?t=11263&highlight=mrt+replace+dot (thread with workaround-solution from Hacker)
  http://ghisler.ch/board/viewtopic.php?p=21712#21712 (discussion including author's statement)

[fredscal]

Yes, apparently there's already been some debate.

Some are asserting that you simply shouldn't name files using dots, to avoid such problem... That it is unorthodox anyway... Well, I don't use dots, i try to remove them. But most of the files on my computer weren't created by me, and i wish to use the MR to clean the mess.
(i'd rather say that here that revive old threads)

Christian has sent me an email (which is very kind of him) explaining that not affecting the extension's 'virtual' dot is impossible. I don't know what to think: on one hand i am sure that he is a very learned and talented programmer (his product proves it), but on the other hand i find such an impossibility very hard to believe in...

I am personally perplexed by the other argument that it is a matter of taste and situation... Who would like to remove the extension's dot ? Some apparently would, which i find strange but OK. But that debate would be rendered academic by a simple checkbox, and everyone could have it their own way.

Another idea would be to completely freeze the extension from being altered by search/replace. After all, how often do you need a change to extensions that you cannot just do via the Extension frame?

So that checkbox could in fact be: [x] affect extension