Combobox incremental seek bug

[Marco Turco]

Hi,
I think there is a bug using the incremental seek in a combobox.

In this self-contained sample at:
www.softwarexp.co.uk/beta/combo.zip

I have and array with 3 elements: First, Second, Third,
When the combobox has the focus press the "S" key to go to the "Second" element then press the "Give me the position" button and you will see that the position value is not the numeric value but the string "Second".

Any ideas ?

Marco

[Armando]

Marco:

Pls try with a numeric var as follow:

acMonths := {"Jan","Feb","Mar","Apr","May","Jun",;
"Jul","Aug","Sep","Oct","Nov","Dec"}

nMonth := 1

REDEFINE COMBOBOX oGet VAR nMonth ID 100 OF oDlg;
PROMPTS acMonths

Regards, Armando

[Marco Turco]

Nothing to do.

If I select the month pressing the first key the return value will be the string instead of the numeric position.

See www.softwarexp.co.uk/beta/test.png

This problem appairs with the latest fivewin version,the FWH April 2006 build runs fine.

Marco

[Antonio Linares]

Marco,

Please make this change at source\classes\combobox.prg line 506:

::Set( If( ValType( Eval( ::bSetGet ) ) == "N", AScan( ::aItems, uItem ), uItem ) )

[Marco Turco]

Yes, the return value is correct now
but the incremental seek runs only for the first key pressed.

You can easely check it in the sample I gave you.

Marco

[Antonio Linares]

Marco,

It seems to work fine.

Please remember that you have to press Space in order to make a new search

[Marco Turco]

Yes, pressing SPACE the seek reinitialize itself but this solution is really unpracticol for the customer.

For example if you have an array like:

Antonio
Fabio
Andrea
Marco
Alfonso
..
..
Alexandro


with the old FWH April 2006 the customer simply pressing "A" go to the first name that start with this character and then can scroll all the name below simply re-pressing "A".

with this latest FWH the customer pressing "A" go to the first name and then he need to use the arrow key to go the next "A" name because the key seek doen't run anymore (and the names could also are not in alphabetic order).

Hope I am explained the problem,
however I can send you a self-contained sample linked with the new and with the old combobox class to show you the difference.

Marco

[Antonio Linares]

Marco,

Yes, you are right, it behaves in a different way. Several customers requested this new behavior to perform incremental search.

You may use the Class TComboBox from the previous FWH build.

[Ugo]

You may use the Class TComboBox from the previous FWH build.

Antonio,
I have insert any modification for incremental or previous use.
If insert the new clause INCREMENTAL the incremental search is active
without new clause the Combobox search is the previous version.

Modify this:

in fivewin.ch:

Code: Select all

#xcommand @ <nRow>, <nCol> COMBOBOX [ <oCbx> VAR ] <cVar> ;
             [ <it: PROMPTS, ITEMS> <aItems> ] ;
             [ SIZE <nWidth>, <nHeight> ] ;
             [ <dlg:OF,WINDOW,DIALOG> <oWnd> ] ;
             [ <help:HELPID, HELP ID> <nHelpId> ] ;
             [ ON CHANGE <uChange> ] ;
             [ VALID <uValid> ] ;
             [ <color: COLOR,COLORS> <nClrText> [,<nClrBack>] ] ;
             [ <pixel: PIXEL> ] ;
             [ FONT <oFont> ] ;
             [ <update: UPDATE> ] ;
             [ MESSAGE <cMsg> ] ;
             [ WHEN <uWhen> ] ;
             [ <design: DESIGN> ] ;
             [ BITMAPS <acBitmaps> ] ;
             [ ON DRAWITEM <uBmpSelect> ] ;
             [ STYLE <nStyle> ] ;
             [ <pict: PICT, PICTURE> <cPicture> ];
             [ ON EDIT CHANGE <uEChange> ] ;
             [ <search: INCREMENTAL, SEARCH, INCR_SEARCH> ] ;
       => ;
          [ <oCbx> := ] TComboBox():New( <nRow>, <nCol>, bSETGET(<cVar>),;
             <aItems>, <nWidth>, <nHeight>, <oWnd>, <nHelpId>,;
             [{|Self|<uChange>}], <{uValid}>, <nClrText>, <nClrBack>,;
             <.pixel.>, <oFont>, <cMsg>, <.update.>, <{uWhen}>,;
             <.design.>, <acBitmaps>, [{|nItem|<uBmpSelect>}], <nStyle>,;
             <cPicture>, [<{uEChange}>], [<.search.>] )

#xcommand REDEFINE COMBOBOX [ <oCbx> VAR ] <cVar> ;
             [ <items: PROMPTS, ITEMS> <aItems> ] ;
             [ ID <nId> ] ;
             [ <dlg:OF,WINDOW,DIALOG> <oWnd> ] ;
             [ <help:HELPID, HELP ID> <nHelpId> ] ;
             [ ON CHANGE <uChange> ] ;
             [ VALID   <uValid> ] ;
             [ <color: COLOR,COLORS> <nClrText> [,<nClrBack>] ] ;
             [ <update: UPDATE> ] ;
             [ MESSAGE <cMsg> ] ;
             [ WHEN <uWhen> ] ;
             [ BITMAPS <acBitmaps> ] ;
             [ ON DRAWITEM <uBmpSelect> ] ;
             [ STYLE <nStyle> ] ;
             [ <pict: PICT, PICTURE> <cPicture> ];
             [ ON EDIT CHANGE <uEChange> ] ;
             [ <search: INCREMENTAL, SEARCH, INCR_SEARCH> ] ;
       => ;
          [ <oCbx> := ] TComboBox():ReDefine( <nId>, bSETGET(<cVar>),;
             <aItems>, <oWnd>, <nHelpId>, <{uValid}>, [{|Self|<uChange>}],;
             <nClrText>, <nClrBack>, <cMsg>, <.update.>, <{uWhen}>,;
             <acBitmaps>, [{|nItem|<uBmpSelect>}], <nStyle>, <cPicture>,;
             [<{uEChange}>], [<.search.>] )

in Combobox.prg

Code: Select all

// at the top
#define MY_INCREMENTAL_SEARCH .F.

...

CLASS TComboBox FROM TControl
   ...
   DATA   lIncrSearch

...
METHOD New( nRow, nCol, bSetGet, aItems, nWidth, nHeight, oWnd, nHelpId,;
            bChange, bValid, nClrFore, nClrBack, lPixel, oFont,;
            cMsg, lUpdate, bWhen, lDesign, acBitmaps, bDrawItem, nStyle,;
            cPict, bEChange, lIncSearch ) CLASS TComboBox
...
   DEFAULT ...,;
           lIncSearch := MY_INCREMENTAL_SEARCH
...
   ::lIncrSearch := lIncSearch
...


METHOD ReDefine( nId, bSetGet, aItems, oWnd, nHelpId, bValid, ;
                 bChange, nClrFore, nClrBack, cMsg, lUpdate, ;
                 bWhen, acBitmaps, bDrawItem, nStyle, cPict, ;
                 bEChange, lIncSearch ) CLASS TComboBox
...
   DEFAULT ...,;
           lIncSearch := MY_INCREMENTAL_SEARCH
...
   ::lIncrSearch := lIncSearch
...



METHOD KeyChar( nKey, nFlags ) CLASS TComboBox

...

   IF ::lIncrSearch
      // Incremental search

      // Actual code 70x version

   else
      // previous method
      Return Super:KeyChar( nKey, nFlags )
   endif

   Return Nil

if you want i send to your private mail the source.

[James Bott]

Marco,

Antonio
Fabio
Andrea
Marco
Alfonso
..
..
Alexandro

I don't think this is a very good design. Potentially, the user could have to type a lot more keystrokes to find what they are looking for. What if there are 50 items beginning with A. They might have to type A, 50 times. However, you can usually find what you want with an incremenal search with 3 or 4 keystrokes even in large lists.

Most users are also going to expect lists to be sorted. Is there a reason you can't use a sorted list?

James

[Marco Turco]

Hi James,
I created an unsorted list only for this sample for a better explain of this problem.

In my commercial apps I obviusly use combos with sorted arrays.

The problem of this new kind of incremental seek is that it is a programmer-like feature and not an end-user feature.
Unfortunately I could have a human-monkey meeting point customers but really I have had a lot of call of customers with many difficult to scroll the combos list with this solution.

There is also the problem that if the customer doesn't remember well the name it want to search then it need to continue the search with the mouse or arrows key. With the old system it has only to press the initial key and (in my apps) it can also make list filters pressing a button.

Best Regars,

Marco

[James Bott]

Marco,

>The problem of this new kind of incremental seek is that it is a programmer-like feature and not an end-user feature. Unfortunately I could have a human-monkey meeting point customers but really I have had a lot of call of customers with many difficult to scroll the combos list with this solution.

I have not heard any complaints. Do you suppose this is just because the behavior changed and they were not used to it? I find that this will happen no matter great of an improvement you make, but after a few weeks they get used to it and you never hear about it again.

>There is also the problem that if the customer doesn't remember well the name it want to search then it need to continue the search with the mouse or arrows key. With the old system it has only to press the initial key and (in my apps) it can also make list filters pressing a button.

In contrast, if they do know the name, then they are going to have to type a lot more keystrokes. If you are looking for a name, Stevens, and there are a hundred names starting with S in the list, and given that T is about 3/4 of the way through the alphabet, with the old system they would have to type S about 75 times. With the new system, they could get to the first occurance of Stevens probably with only two keystrokes-ST. That is a big difference.

I just tried an example with only about 200 names in the list and nine starting with S and one Stevens. It takes 2 keystrokes to get to Stevens using incremental searching and 7 with the old system. Still much less work with incremental searching.

If your app supports user configuration, then you could allow each user to configure this particular behavior to the way they like it. That solves it nicely.

James