[qutebrowser] Some feelings about v1.0

José Alberto Orejuela García jose.gif at hotmail.com
Wed Oct 25 18:02:27 CEST 2017


Hello,

I'm a bit late (I had a lot of work last week), but here is my answer. =)

> I think Florian addressed this one -- up/down are used for history, leaving just
> tab/shift-tab for completion selection. I think this mirrors what people are
> used to from a shell.
> 
> I find I use tab for completion, alt-p/n for history, and never touch those
> annoying arrow keys :)

Yes, I agree that's the best, and now I will get used to it.

> How about <ctrl+w> to delete the last word?

It just deletes everything if it's an URL or something like seem to be a word.

> So something like vim's completeopt=longest? That is, complete the longest
> substring of the available completions? I could see this being useful for things
> like settings. It seems nearly useless for URL's though. I almost never type
> `:open http://`, but without that, you wouldn't be matching anything by a prefix
> plus you'd miss out on https://, ect. I'm not sure I'd want to implement
> different completion behaviors for different completion types, but it isn't a
> bad suggestion.

I only said it because I felt I was missing something like that, but they were settings sections, and I agree with how it's done now (see next answer).

> I was one of the ones who pushed for this change. I could never seem to remember
> what section a given option belonged in. Is "User-Agent" general or network?
> What about "private-browsing"? I frequently had to try several sections. Now I
> just type ":set user_agent" and it completes to "content.headers.user_agent".

Yes, yes, I completely agree on that, I had to try several sections as well to find things. The point is that I was missing that and I didn't realise, but I prefer it as it is right now.

> FWIW, there is a more detailed explanation here:
> https://github.com/qutebrowser/qutebrowser/blob/master/doc/help/configuring.asciidoc#migrating-older-configurations

Ah, great, thanks. =)

> Sorry, that was poorly worded on my part, I wasn't blaming you. That was more
> of a general statement.

OK. =)

> Yes - if you filter for ! in e.g. the setting value completion or whatever, you
> wouldn't expect qutebrowser to filter for %21.

But the point is that it doesn't matter as there won't be strings like that in settings, don't you think?

> Kind of - sections just don't exist anymore, because they made both the code
> and using :set (as you needed to know what section something was in) more
> complicated.
>
> That does indeed mean qute://settings is a bit less organized now, but I'm not
> sure what to do about that.

Well, they could be split using the parts between full stops, but I think it's not worth it.

By the way, I also find the browser more slow when scrolling, is that due to qtwebengine as well?

I also have 2 issues more:

- Sometimes, when I use hints to go to a form box to fill it, it doesn't enter insert mode (and if I enter insert mode manually with "i", nothing is written as I type). I will find a concrete example in a page (I forgot to write it down when it happened) and send it, so you can skip this by now until I find a place to reproduce it.

- Randomly, qutebrowser seems to get stuck but it's not, it's only the graphical part. For example, if I open a new tab (it should focus on it as that's the usual case), I keep seeing the same in the window (except that I can see that page title is different, as if I were on the new tab); I can even click on other tabs and see that page title changes, but not the content or tabs bar, those are frozen, even though I can click on them and I can see that they're interacting. If I minimise the window and then restore it, everything is fixed; BUT sometimes, before I can minimise it, it gets all graphics in the computer stucked and I see a notification like "desktop effects were restored due to a graphic problem" (I'm using plasma on Arch). I guess this will be hard to debug, so if I can help in any way, I'm willing to do it.

Regards,

José Alberto


On miércoles, 18 de octubre de 2017 13:57:44 (CEST) Ryan Roden-Corrent wrote:
> Hi José!
> 
> Thanks for the great email, there's lots of clear, constructive feedback here.
> 
> > Default behaviour for moving between completions is tab or shift-tab. I know
> > that I can make arrow keys also do the job in settings, but what is the point
> > of having that disabled by default now? 
> 
> I think Florian addressed this one -- up/down are used for history, leaving just
> tab/shift-tab for completion selection. I think this mirrors what people are
> used to from a shell.
> 
> I find I use tab for completion, alt-p/n for history, and never touch those
> annoying arrow keys :)
> 
> > Completion is sometimes sorted differently. For example, when I wanted to
> > clear downloads, I used to write ":clear" and hit tab, the two results were
> > download-clear
> > history-clear
> > and they were alphabetically sorted. Now, the completions for that are
> > search
> > history-clear
> > download-clear
> > config-clear
> > and I cannot see what the pattern is, but it's not alphabetically in command
> > or command description, for sure. Why is this now happening?
> 
> I'm calling this a bug. They are sorted initially but we lose sorting when you
> filter. I created https://github.com/qutebrowser/qutebrowser/issues/3156 to
> track.
> 
> > Not being able to go back to original. I think it could be useful to undo
> > completion, for example, writing something, hitting tab (or down arrow) and
> > then shift-tab (or up arrow). When I hit tab accidentally I have to start from
> > scratch.
> 
> How about <ctrl+w> to delete the last word?
> 
> > Taking into account substitutions in urls. For example, if I want to
> > find an url that contained a bang, I cannot find it using ":open !"
> > because that won't give any result as ! was changed to %21 in the url.
> 
> This depends on how you got to the url. If I navigate to example.com/foo!bar,
> that exact string will show up in my completions, and will show up with 
> ":open !". If I navigate explicitly to example.com/foo%21bar, then we will not
> automatically decode it. I think maybe we could with QURL.FullyDecoded? If so,
> do we want to? Florian?
> 
> > Completion until next difference: when I write ":set col" and hit tab,
> > it'd be nice if it completed to color before completing directly to
> > colors.completion.category.bg. 
> 
> So something like vim's completeopt=longest? That is, complete the longest
> substring of the available completions? I could see this being useful for things
> like settings. It seems nearly useless for URL's though. I almost never type
> `:open http://`, but without that, you wouldn't be matching anything by a prefix
> plus you'd miss out on https://, ect. I'm not sure I'd want to implement
> different completion behaviors for different completion types, but it isn't a
> bad suggestion.
> 
> > The point is that settings were split in sections before, so I could hit tab
> > step by step to complete, and that was (I think) what I was missing
> > subconsciously.
> 
> I was one of the ones who pushed for this change. I could never seem to remember
> what section a given option belonged in. Is "User-Agent" general or network?
> What about "private-browsing"? I frequently had to try several sections. Now I
> just type ":set user_agent" and it completes to "content.headers.user_agent".
> 
> > Overall, I'm not feeling bad about the update and I'd like to thank
> > Florian and all the contributors for all the work you've done. =)
> 
> Thank YOU for writing this email. We can't fix things we don't know about :)
> 
> - Ryan (rcorre)
> 
> On Wed 10/18/17 06:32AM, Florian Bruhin wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 08:39:38PM +0000, José Alberto Orejuela García wrote:
> > > > That being said, I had no idea how many people use arrow keys to navigate
> > > > through the completion, and I changed it because a lot of people expected
> > > > up/down to go through the history.
> > > 
> > > Yes, I also liked it, the point is that I didn't know it was that. Maybe you
> > > put it in the changelog and I missed that part (I usually read them), sorry.
> > > =P
> > 
> > I did indeed forget to put it in the original changelog and then added it a bit
> > later, so that might be me to blame ;-)
> > 
> > FWIW, there is a more detailed explanation here:
> > https://github.com/qutebrowser/qutebrowser/blob/master/doc/help/configuring.asciidoc#migrating-older-configurations
> > 
> > > > Can't please everyone I guess, but I'm tired of the bikeshedding[1] :P
> > > > 
> > > > [1] https://shed.bike/
> > > 
> > > I was only asking for understanding, not trying to demand anything. I'm sorry
> > > about making you feel like that.
> > 
> > Sorry, that was poorly worded on my part, I wasn't blaming you. That was more
> > of a general statement.
> > 
> > > > Also, it introduces special completion matching only applicable to :open, which
> > > > is another thing I'd like to avoid.
> > > 
> > > You could implement it everywhere, do you thing it will lead to problems with
> > > other commands?
> > 
> > Yes - if you filter for ! in e.g. the setting value completion or whatever, you
> > wouldn't expect qutebrowser to filter for %21.
> > 
> > > > > - Completion until next difference: when I write ":set col" and hit tab, it'd
> > > > > be nice if it completed to color before completing directly to
> > > > > colors.completion.category.bg. This is certainly the feature that I see
> > > > > hardest to being useful given a proper implementation, because normally there
> > > > > could be a lot of partial different coincidences, for example typing
> > > > > "duckduck" maybe it should be changed to duckduckgo based on urls or
> > > > > DuckDuckGo based on page titles. It's also the thing I miss the least of
> > > > > these three.
> > > > 
> > > > I can see how that'd be useful for settings, but again, this would introduce
> > > > special handling for one particular completion.
> > > 
> > > Yes, I have just realised why I was thinking about that. The point is that
> > > settings were split in sections before, so I could hit tab step by step to
> > > complete, and that was (I think) what I was missing subconsciously.
> > > 
> > > Also, that led to a qute://settings page split in sections, tidier than the
> > > new one (it's a minor thing, of course). Is that intentional?
> > 
> > Kind of - sections just don't exist anymore, because they made both the code
> > and using :set (as you needed to know what section something was in) more
> > complicated.
> > 
> > That does indeed mean qute://settings is a bit less organized now, but I'm not
> > sure what to do about that.
> > 
> > Florian
> > 
> 
> 



More information about the qutebrowser mailing list