In in a pane, you enter ab, the selected line (if something starting with ab exists) will be the first ab... entry, ditto for bc, etc.
If you want to jump to aa..., bb..., cc..., ..., this does NOT work accordingly.
(It's been years I'm suffering from this, and since nobody else seems to notice, I finally bring it up myself.)
Bug: No quickjump to entry starting with char-samechar
Moderators: fgagnon, nikos, Site Mods
Re: Bug: No quickjump to entry starting with char-samechar
You are right, and the Windows Explorer behaves the same way.
The reason for this, though, is that repeated uses of the (same) character cause the selected item to advance to the next item starting with that letter. The first use of the letter gets you to the first item with that letter; subsequent uses get you to the subsequent items with that letter. If you have a batch of items starting with, say, h, you can repeatedly type "h" to step through them in order to pick the one you want.
This is a useful behavior, one I am used to using, and I think I'd sort of prefer that i stay this way
The reason for this, though, is that repeated uses of the (same) character cause the selected item to advance to the next item starting with that letter. The first use of the letter gets you to the first item with that letter; subsequent uses get you to the subsequent items with that letter. If you have a batch of items starting with, say, h, you can repeatedly type "h" to step through them in order to pick the one you want.
This is a useful behavior, one I am used to using, and I think I'd sort of prefer that i stay this way
Re: Bug: No quickjump to entry starting with char-samechar
the only remedy here is to use the quickfilter bar (next to the addressbar)
Re: Bug: No quickjump to entry starting with char-samechar
I was differentiating, as is usually done, between immediate pressing of 2 keys, "ab" within a second or so, and 1-key pressing, then again 1-key pressing after a little pause.
What the "it's good as it is" user above probably has in mind, is very quick pressing the 1-key pressing again and again, or even staying your finger on the key; I tried both, and both, i.e. even the distinct pressing had the same result as described below, and nobody would need or want this. (Btw, we buy file managers for getting something better than what MS deems acceptable for us "consumers". Also, there is very special behavior in SpeedCommander, but that is exotic software without English help/forum.)
So I got manually to the first "cc..." (since "cc" would get me first "ca...", in alphanumeric sorting). Then I quickly pressed several times "c" (instead of my usual arrow-down) in order to get to the next "cc...", and almost immediately, the focus changed to that filter field above the list, and found my "c" 's in there, and the filter was automatically applied, i.e. there wasn't anything left in the display pane (where previously I had more than 1,000 entries).
Thus, I do NOT understand what the "is good as it is" user above wants to express by his "explanation", which tries to mix up 1-key, immediate 2-key and individual key pressings with some sort of interruption (of perhaps half a second in-between).
(The weird behavior of SpeedCommander - but which is NOT the case here - where with 1-key "a" you are then stuck in the "a's" MAKES sense in some use cases indeed but only when you don't have alphanumeric sort there; unfortunately it's not only then and/or only by option, which both would have been easy; but I certainly don't grasp any sense of the x2 non-standard behavior (and if MS is "standard", well...)
So, while trying out to check what the "explanation" of the "it's good as it is" user above tried to explain, I even discovered more bugs. Oh well.
What the "it's good as it is" user above probably has in mind, is very quick pressing the 1-key pressing again and again, or even staying your finger on the key; I tried both, and both, i.e. even the distinct pressing had the same result as described below, and nobody would need or want this. (Btw, we buy file managers for getting something better than what MS deems acceptable for us "consumers". Also, there is very special behavior in SpeedCommander, but that is exotic software without English help/forum.)
So I got manually to the first "cc..." (since "cc" would get me first "ca...", in alphanumeric sorting). Then I quickly pressed several times "c" (instead of my usual arrow-down) in order to get to the next "cc...", and almost immediately, the focus changed to that filter field above the list, and found my "c" 's in there, and the filter was automatically applied, i.e. there wasn't anything left in the display pane (where previously I had more than 1,000 entries).
Thus, I do NOT understand what the "is good as it is" user above wants to express by his "explanation", which tries to mix up 1-key, immediate 2-key and individual key pressings with some sort of interruption (of perhaps half a second in-between).
(The weird behavior of SpeedCommander - but which is NOT the case here - where with 1-key "a" you are then stuck in the "a's" MAKES sense in some use cases indeed but only when you don't have alphanumeric sort there; unfortunately it's not only then and/or only by option, which both would have been easy; but I certainly don't grasp any sense of the x2 non-standard behavior (and if MS is "standard", well...)
So, while trying out to check what the "explanation" of the "it's good as it is" user above tried to explain, I even discovered more bugs. Oh well.
Re: Bug: No quickjump to entry starting with char-samechar
Also (no edit possible it seems), in SC, this "stuck" behavior applies to any second character (identical to the first one or not), since here in x2, it's just for identical characters, which makes even less sense, since the "explanation" above seemingly also mixes up first and second char, there does not seem to be any logic in all this.
Short "explanations" for complicated situations are a bit TOO lazy, and often also an insult, since they imply the addressee should understand their logic when in fact they are illogical, but they are perfectly on par with the "it's good enough as it is" message.
I have the impression that x2 uses lots of original MS good-enough code, and hence we must live with the original MS bug.
Short "explanations" for complicated situations are a bit TOO lazy, and often also an insult, since they imply the addressee should understand their logic when in fact they are illogical, but they are perfectly on par with the "it's good enough as it is" message.
I have the impression that x2 uses lots of original MS good-enough code, and hence we must live with the original MS bug.