You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
So in its current incarnation, Find-Jump can match block characters. You just type the block character and try to narrow down the search by entering the characters that appear after it.
The "narrowing down" is actually nothing fancy. The more characters you type, the more unique your search becomes so the fewer hits there are on the document. So even if you are trying to reach a location with )), if you enter )) into Find-Jump, that'll help it narrow down the search.
The one place that is not possible for Find-Jump to jump to is end-of-line (EOL). I have an idea of how we can handle that, but I'm not sure about it. Currently, the enter key exits Find-Jump. We can make it instead highlight 26 EOLs above and 26 EOLs below the cursor. That would allow you to jump to the position after the last character on the line, even block character.
So with the exception of the EOL situation, Find-Jump as it is now can jump to before or after block characters. It maybe less convenient than: press a shortcut → highlight all block characters → enter jump sequence → done...But Find-Jump can't do that well the way it's designed because it only has 52 jump characters to suggest. And I would think that many times there would be more than 52 locations before and after all block characters on the document. I don't think it's a good experience for the user to trigger this command and sometimes the location that they want to go to is not highlighted because all the jump characters were used up by other locations in the document.
I'd love a command that could jump to the characters that determine a "block" of code, such as: (){}[]<>
The tricky bit would be I'd love to be able to jump before or after the character.
Also, "narrowing down" might be difficult since many special chars are followed by the same character.
Thoughts?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: