RE: [platform-ui-dev] Workbench editor cycling

["Tsai, Philip" <Philip.Tsai@xxxxxxxxxx>]

 One immediate feedback I have is that it looks like the list in EditorList View is different from the one shown through Ctrl-F6.  Also, the result of the forward and backward action does not look straightforward,  thus confusing (in my case, the selection jumps from one place to another in the list, instead of the cycling behavior I would exepect)....  Can you explain what the forward and backward buttons are suppose to do?

 Thanks, 
 Philip

-----Original Message-----
From: Jared Burns [mailto:jared-eclipse@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 3:59 PM
To: Tsai, Philip
Cc: platform-ui-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [platform-ui-dev] Workbench editor cycling


The view has forward/backward history navigation, but I had to implement my 
own history mechanism (not hard). I'm not sure why the old API was removed, 
but I believe it had something to do with the migration to "light editors" 
(at least that's when the change was checked into CVS).

- Jared

On Tuesday 27 August 2002 04:40 pm, you wrote:
>  :-)  Well, the last response from you in the April thread (BTW, searching
>  : was what I did to find that thread) does not indicate where to find the
>  : information next.  Looking for your name next to platform-ui-dev threads
>  : is how I find your recent thread.  Do a search on your name would return
>  : too many unintuitive results.
>
>  One feedback about this is: it will be great if the cycling-editor list is
> available as a pull-down from the editor area (I would rather have recent
> navigation history pulldown than a left-and-right editor tab navigation). 
> I simply find Ctrl-F6 to be quite an unintuitive feature and couldn't quite
> believe that a nice feature like this will be hidden from the visible UI. 
> The forward and backward history navigation is such a popular and useful UI
> feature (e.g. the browser we use everyday, the Eclipse's own help system,
> and so many other everyday examples) that it surprised and disappointed me
> to find that such feature is not bundled with the workbench.  The April
> thread even mentioned that such API wasn't supposed to be publicly
> available, which would hinder your contribution on this(?).
>
>  Glad to find that at least someone has thought about this and even
> contributed a view.  :-)  I will let you know how it works.
>
>  Thanks,
>  Philip