BBEdit 13: Please, improvements instead of gimmicks

134 views
Skip to first unread message

Tom

unread,
Oct 10, 2019, 9:20:08 PM10/10/19
to BBEdit Talk
Hey guys,

as much as I like the Playground thingy for regexen, it’s nothing we didn’t do already on regex101 for the last years.

So, instead of those gimmicky (though nice) additions, I really would like to see non-contigous selection. As almost any other text program on macOS can do.

Any thoughts/timeline?

Thanks,

-- 
Tom

Tom Robinson

unread,
Oct 10, 2019, 10:45:32 PM10/10/19
to BBEdit Talk
See the ungimmicky footer of every message to this group:

> If you have a
> feature request or need technical support, please email
> "sup...@barebones.com" rather than posting to the group.

Gustave Stresen-Reuter

unread,
Oct 11, 2019, 3:26:55 AM10/11/19
to bbe...@googlegroups.com
Not sure if this is what you want but you can edit all instances of found text. Not at my computer so can't consult the docs but it is possible.

What else would you use discontiguous selections for (serious question)?

Ted

--
This is the BBEdit Talk public discussion group. If you have a
feature request or need technical support, please email
"sup...@barebones.com" rather than posting to the group.
Follow @bbedit on Twitter: <https://twitter.com/bbedit>
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BBEdit Talk" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bbedit+un...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bbedit/BEE3E49E-192F-4E8C-9D83-287ECB930EAE%40gmail.com.

Sam Hathaway

unread,
Oct 11, 2019, 10:49:01 AM10/11/19
to bbe...@googlegroups.com

On October 11, 2019 3:26:56 AM Gustave Stresen-Reuter tedmas...@gmail.com wrote:

What else would you use discontiguous selections for (serious question)?

Lack of multiple selection is one of several things that make me jealous of VSCode/Atom/SublimeText users. In one of those editors, I would change the types of some variables in a struct like this:

  • select a word (say, uint16_t)
  • hit a key combo to also select the next instance of the selected word
  • and the next one
  • and the next one
  • ok, I've selected all the instances of uint16_t in this struct that I want to change
  • type: uint32_t

This is different from editing all instance of some text. If I’m changing a few variables in one struct from being 16-bit to 32-bit, that doesn’t mean I want to change every single uint16_t in the file.

I can get close with current BBEdit like this:

  • select a word (say, uint16_t)
  • hit Cmd-E (to set find text)
  • type: uint32_t
  • hit Opt-Shift-Left to select the word I just typed
  • hit Cmd-Opt-E (to set replace text)
  • hit Cmd-G
  • hit Cmd-T
  • hit Cmd-T
  • hit Cmd-T

This is… okay… I guess… but the keyboard acrobatics are a little stressful on my fingers, and I don’t like that I have to enter the replacement text first, before selecting all the instances that I want to change. It’s conceptually cleaner for me to “grab” all the text I want to change, and then change it all at once.

If all the words I want to change are on adjacent lines and lined up vertically, I can use a rectangular selection and this works pretty well (as long as I remember to use Cmd-Z rather than Backspace if I make a mistake). I wish I could do this even when things are not lined up nicely.

Does that make sense?
-sam

bruce linde

unread,
Oct 11, 2019, 10:59:02 AM10/11/19
to bbe...@googlegroups.com
wait… 

1. select your ‘want to change things in this block of text’ section.

2. set your ‘find ____’ text and your ‘replace with ______’ text

3. check the ‘search and replace in selected text only’ checkbox.

unless i’m missing something?

bruce













bruce linde
5 happiness webmaster (four more than the competition!)
http://www.5happy.com/
http://clockhappy.com/
510.530.1331 office
510.206.9730 mobile

(shift key available upon request)








StefanW

unread,
Oct 11, 2019, 11:31:06 AM10/11/19
to BBEdit Talk
+1 on the might-be-missing-something - but also there's:
- set text-to-find and text-to-replace
- Search --> Replace All in Selection (control-command-equal)

The only reason I can imagine right now why that wouldn't work as a solution for the use case cited is if instances of matching text that are NOT to be changed fall within the selected text. 

Having the ability to have multiple non-contiguous selection ranges does sound appealing, but it would probably have to be some new modifier-key for a click-and-drag IMHO.

Sam Hathaway

unread,
Oct 11, 2019, 11:34:15 AM10/11/19
to bbe...@googlegroups.com

I don’t really know how to articulate this.

Maybe: opening the dialog box breaks flow.

Or: it feels more natural to do this with multiple selections.

In a sense, it’s more of a “direct manipulation” than using the find/replace tool.

Also: selecting a large range of text (a complete function, including the prototype, etc.) is often awkward, requiring use of the mouse or a lot of fiddling with arrow keys. The multiple selection workflow is completely keyboard-based.

I’m not disputing that there may be ways to achieve the same goal in BBEdit currently. My claim is that multiple selection has advantages over the current methods.

Hope this helps.
-sam

bruce linde

unread,
Oct 11, 2019, 11:55:31 AM10/11/19
to bbe...@googlegroups.com
i was responding to your specific example… which is easily handled by find and replace. for me, it’s as simple as… without looking at my hands:

command-e - pack find field
command-option-e - pack replace field
command-f 
select ‘selected text only’
replace all

not sure what your flow is, but this is so second nature to me that it takes < 15 seconds. and… i trust bbedit to find ALL instances of something (selected text only, or not) more than i trust myself… yet another argument for my method. using combinations of keyboard and mouse gives the best results AND flow (imho).

on the other hand, i could use a ‘select non-contiguous text’ feature when in applied bullshitology mode and writing copy for my clients’ websites. it would be nice to be able to select non-continguous sentences (for example) and then paste them into a new/re-assembled paragraph.

bruce











Tom

unread,
Oct 11, 2019, 12:32:57 PM10/11/19
to BBEdit Talk
Sometimes it’s “just” this: 

- Selecting a couple of (non-contiguous) lines or sentences
- Selecting only parts of a sentence
- Removing some elements from a selection  

If you are working with prose or markup text (e.g. TeX, HTML), this happens quite often.

Of course, the absence of non-contiguous selections is not a game breaker, since you can always achieve what you want by other means. It’s a quality-of-life thingy. But ten years ago I would never have thought that this still will be an issue with BBEdit in 2019…

To my (positive) surprise, I just noticed that option-selecting now works also in soft-wrapping mode. If I recall correctly, this wasn’t the case some time ago.

– Tom
wait… 

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bbe...@googlegroups.com.

--
This is the BBEdit Talk public discussion group. If you have a
feature request or need technical support, please email
"sup...@barebones.com" rather than posting to the group.
Follow @bbedit on Twitter: <https://twitter.com/bbedit>
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BBEdit Talk" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bbe...@googlegroups.com.

--
This is the BBEdit Talk public discussion group. If you have a
feature request or need technical support, please email
"sup...@barebones.com" rather than posting to the group.
Follow @bbedit on Twitter: <https://twitter.com/bbedit>
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BBEdit Talk" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bbe...@googlegroups.com.





bruce linde
5 happiness webmaster (four more than the competition!)
http://www.5happy.com/
http://clockhappy.com/
510.530.1331 office
510.206.9730 mobile

(shift key available upon request)








--
This is the BBEdit Talk public discussion group. If you have a
feature request or need technical support, please email
"sup...@barebones.com" rather than posting to the group.
Follow @bbedit on Twitter: <https://twitter.com/bbedit>
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "BBEdit Talk" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bbe...@googlegroups.com.

Rich Siegel

unread,
Oct 11, 2019, 1:48:00 PM10/11/19
to bbe...@googlegroups.com
On 10/11/19 at 12:32 PM, bbe...@googlegroups.com ('Tom' via
BBEdit Talk)
wrote:

>To my (positive) surprise, I just noticed that option-selecting now
>works also in soft-wrapping mode. If I recall correctly, this wasn’t
>the case some time ago.

I can see how you might miss some surprising things if you
didn't read much past the first change or two in the notes. >:-)

R.
--
Rich Siegel Bare Bones Software, Inc.
<sie...@barebones.com> <http://www.barebones.com/>

Someday I'll look back on all this and laugh... until they
sedate me.

Tom

unread,
Oct 13, 2019, 10:44:57 AM10/13/19
to BBEdit Talk
Reading your change notes would just spoil the exalting moments of surprise, like this one ;-)

– Tom
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages