Community
Participate
Working Groups
I find it little bit annoying to get search results in the form of File-Path. Since this is plain text it is not very easily perceivable to which path a file is located. I cannot sort the path anyhow. On the other hand it would be good to find same paths together (If I want to search for). Therefore I propose to fill the search results into a table with two columns.
Did you see that you can show the result in a tree? (Search view menu, Show As tree (Hierarchical))
After fumbling around, I found it. Yeah, I see the point, nevertheless I'm not completely conviced that a List is good perceivable. First of all the default setting is a List and most of the users will not find the switch resp. post this. it's somehow workable, but not very userfriendly. On the other hand, e.g. the Problems are sorted within a JTable and are clearly perceivable. With 'perceivable' I mean the distinction between name and path. So, from point of User I would vote for the JTable as a result-set instead of a JList.
No plans to change on table for 3.2
(In reply to comment #2) > On the other hand, e.g. the Problems are sorted within a JTable and are clearly > perceivable. With 'perceivable' I mean the distinction between name and path. > > So, from point of User I would vote for the JTable as a result-set instead of a > JList. By the way, Eclipse is not built on Swing so those aren't actually JTables or JLists. I do think that adding columns to the TreeViewer or using a TableViewer could be useful. Could this get reopened for consideration in 3.4?
I do not mind about if it is Swing or not. As long as there is some kind of Table or even better a TreeTable then it would be perfectly fine.
Help is welcome as we are only in maintenance mode for the search plug-in. So, there are no plans for this in 3.4.
This bug hasn't had any activity in quite some time. Maybe the problem got resolved, was a duplicate of something else, or became less pressing for some reason - or maybe it's still relevant but just hasn't been looked at yet. If you have further information on the current state of the bug, please add it. The information can be, for example, that the problem still occurs, that you still want the feature, that more information is needed, or that the bug is (for whatever reason) no longer relevant.
