Community
Participate
Working Groups
Build Identifier: 20090920-1017 Having a history of previous searches is good, but sometimes I want to rerun a very similar search, with a slightly different criterion. So, I open the search history, select the previous search for editing, change one criterion and run the updated search. Would require some extra UI dialog, exposing editable search criteria. Reproducible: Always
Note that each page in the Search dialog offers the last used searches which can easily be tweaked. We could add an 'Open in Search Dialog' action in the Search view.
Good point, but I forgot to give more detail about my "problem": I want to search in the same, selected scope. But by the time I want the rerun the modified search, the selected scope has been altered and it's annoying to move back to the "Package Explorer" view, browse to the previously selected resource (directory), and restart the search. So, in the end, I want to rerun the search with altered "Search string", but same "File name patterns" and previously selected scope, and all this with a minimal amount of user input. Maybe I want too much. :-)
Right: my first hint won't help you there unless you use working sets instead of selection scopes. My suggested improvement to open dialog from the search would fix your scenario since it would feed the current query (including scope) into the dialog.
We could also use the previous scope implicitly when the Search action is invoked while the selection is empty (maybe only if the Search view is focused). That's actually what bug 269632 and bug 247590 requested. It is a bit hidden, but I think it would just "do the right thing" in the 90% case.
No matter how we proceed, we have to add a way so that the user can actually see (and probably also edit) that selection.
(In reply to comment #1) > We could add an 'Open in Search Dialog' action in the Search view. See bug 199990 .
*** Bug 308638 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
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.
