It is currently June 16th, 2021, 11:05 am

Bug (or near enough): the 'editor' field, under 'Manage', looks editable but is not

Report bugs with the Rainmeter application and suggest features.
jn_meter
Posts: 90
Joined: December 27th, 2016, 12:04 pm

Bug (or near enough): the 'editor' field, under 'Manage', looks editable but is not

Post by jn_meter »

In this window

Image

the 'editor' field gives the impression that one can edit it by typing in it. Indeed, one can place the caret in it. Yet, one cannot actually edit it via the keyboard. One must - one discovers, to one's surprise and irritation - use the file picker.

PS in case anyone finds this issue having just upgraded from Sublime Text 3 to Sublime Text 4: one needs to change the editor path from C:\Program Files\Sublime Text 3\sublime_text.exe to C:\Program Files\Sublime Text\sublime_text.exe. That is, one needs to remove the 3 (including its preceding space.
User avatar
jsmorley
Developer
Posts: 21758
Joined: April 19th, 2009, 11:02 pm
Location: Fort Hunt, Virginia, USA

Re: Bug (or near enough): the 'editor' field, under 'Manage', looks editable but is not

Post by jsmorley »

jn_meter wrote: May 21st, 2021, 5:38 pm In this window

Image

the 'editor' field gives the impression that one can edit it by typing in it. Indeed, one can place the caret in it. Yet, one cannot actually edit it via the keyboard. One must - one discovers, to one's surprise and irritation - use the file picker.

PS in case anyone finds this issue having just upgraded from Sublime Text 3 to Sublime Text 4: one needs to change the editor path from C:\Program Files\Sublime Text 3\sublime_text.exe to C:\Program Files\Sublime Text\sublime_text.exe. That is, one needs to remove the 3 (including its preceding space.
You can also "Edit Settings" and change the value of ConfigEditor in Rainmeter.ini. Then Refresh All.

We don't want to encourage manually changing that value in the Settings panel though, as if a user gets it wrong, it can make fixing it complicated, since there won't be any automatic way to bring up Rainmeter.ini in an editor. That is why we prefer the explicit "picking" of the editor executable. It's certainly not a bug.
jn_meter
Posts: 90
Joined: December 27th, 2016, 12:04 pm

Re: Bug (or near enough): the 'editor' field, under 'Manage', looks editable but is not

Post by jn_meter »

Thanks, morley, but that's not really the point, is it?
User avatar
jsmorley
Developer
Posts: 21758
Joined: April 19th, 2009, 11:02 pm
Location: Fort Hunt, Virginia, USA

Re: Bug (or near enough): the 'editor' field, under 'Manage', looks editable but is not

Post by jsmorley »

jn_meter wrote: May 21st, 2021, 5:52 pm Thanks, morley, but that's not really the point, is it?
So what is the point?
jn_meter
Posts: 90
Joined: December 27th, 2016, 12:04 pm

Re: Bug (or near enough): the 'editor' field, under 'Manage', looks editable but is not

Post by jn_meter »

The point is that the window of which I wrote exhibits a bug or something that is close enough to a bug. To wit: the user is given the impression that he or she can do something - something that some users will find useful to do - and actually the user cannot do that thing. The thing in question is: edit the field.
User avatar
jsmorley
Developer
Posts: 21758
Joined: April 19th, 2009, 11:02 pm
Location: Fort Hunt, Virginia, USA

Re: Bug (or near enough): the 'editor' field, under 'Manage', looks editable but is not

Post by jsmorley »

jn_meter wrote: May 21st, 2021, 5:55 pm The point is that the window of which I wrote exhibits a bug or something that is close enough to a bug. To wit: the user is given the impression that he or she can do something - something that some users will find useful to do - and actually the user cannot do that thing. The thing in question is: edit the field.
We don't want to encourage manually changing that value in the Settings panel though, as if a user gets it wrong, it can make fixing it complicated, since there won't be any automatic way to bring up Rainmeter.ini in an editor. That is why we prefer the explicit "picking" of the editor executable. It's certainly not a bug.
We could make that information a "label" instead of a read-only "field", but then you couldn't highlight and copy it, which we want, and there would be "real-estate" issues depending on how long the string is.
jn_meter
Posts: 90
Joined: December 27th, 2016, 12:04 pm

Re: Bug (or near enough): the 'editor' field, under 'Manage', looks editable but is not

Post by jn_meter »

Right. So there are two options. (1) Allow editing and do some validation of the path, namely, check that an executable file exists there. (The file picker itself will not do any more validation than that.) Or else (2) Have some text, or a pop-up, that labels the non-editable field as non-editable. I prefer 1.
User avatar
jsmorley
Developer
Posts: 21758
Joined: April 19th, 2009, 11:02 pm
Location: Fort Hunt, Virginia, USA

Re: Bug (or near enough): the 'editor' field, under 'Manage', looks editable but is not

Post by jsmorley »

jn_meter wrote: May 21st, 2021, 6:01 pm Right. So there are two options. (1) Allow editing and do some validation of the path, namely, check that an executable file exists there. (The file picker itself will not do any more validation than that.) Or else (2) Have some text, or a pop-up, that labels the non-editable field as non-editable. I prefer 1.
Sorry, nothing is going to change there. It's fine as it is.
jn_meter
Posts: 90
Joined: December 27th, 2016, 12:04 pm

Re: Bug (or near enough): the 'editor' field, under 'Manage', looks editable but is not

Post by jn_meter »

I submit that it is not fine as it is. For, as things stand, the window (i) is apt to give a false impression, (ii) prevents the user from doing something useful. There is also this: (iii) pretty much all that is needed in order to improve things is to check whether a path exists. Note also that small improvements do add up (to a better user experience)!
User avatar
Jeff
Posts: 212
Joined: September 3rd, 2018, 11:18 am

Re: Bug (or near enough): the 'editor' field, under 'Manage', looks editable but is not

Post by Jeff »

Oh snap it's time for this now 7 year old pull request to finally be of use which even adds a check for command line parameters
I'd be happy with this change, if the config editor line was still explicit as it is, but a new box was added that allowed you to add command lines (and you have to enable it with a tickbox, so you can't have people hitting their head on the keyboard even screw this up)