Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Code Structure list does not remember its width #26

Open
LaraSQP opened this issue Apr 25, 2020 · 3 comments
Open

Code Structure list does not remember its width #26

LaraSQP opened this issue Apr 25, 2020 · 3 comments
Assignees
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@LaraSQP
Copy link

LaraSQP commented Apr 25, 2020

Using 0.2.44.2

It seems that SteroidsVS remembers the width of the Code Structure list per file (rather than globally).

It also seems that SteroidsVS forgets the width used if the file is reopened.

It is unclear if this is by design or not.

I would rather have a global setting that is remembered across files. Failing that, a setting per file that survives reopening.

Thanks again for this must-have extension.

@eberthold
Copy link
Owner

Thanks for the nice feedback.

At the moment the view is designed to always fall back to the initial width of 250 if the file is reopened.

I second that remembering the last width would be a nice addition the feature list. I will have to read the user settings API for VS to know in which extend those values could be saved. I think a limit like the last 500 or 1000 files would be useful to avoid slowly increasing user data - we developers tend to open a lot of files over time 😏

For globally width syncing I'm not sure if I personally would like it. But this shouldn't be that hard to implement I will have a look and may add a Tools->Options page to activate it as an optional feature.

@eberthold eberthold added the enhancement New feature or request label May 4, 2020
@eberthold eberthold self-assigned this May 4, 2020
@LaraSQP
Copy link
Author

LaraSQP commented May 4, 2020

You rock.

@LaraSQP
Copy link
Author

LaraSQP commented May 5, 2020

It occurs to me that a simple solution (again, for me) would be to expose the default initial value of 250 so that it could be changed to something else.

That would solve 95% of my problems right away.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants