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

Added ability to iterate through search results in response pane #195

Closed

Conversation

kmayoral
Copy link
Contributor

This uses the IME search action button as the method for iterating through search resultt

📷 Screenshots

Video here:
iterate

📄 Context

Why did you change something? Is there an issue to link here? Or an extarnal link?
I was looking for an easy way to iterate between multiple search results in long json responses viewed through Chucker.

📝 Changes

Which code did you change? How?
The transaction adapter/fragment code. Added a few mutable variables to keep track of state, open to any suggestions for clean up, I was just getting something easy in for my purposes.

📎 Related PR

PR that blocks this one, or the ones blocked by this PR

⚠️ Breaking

Is there something breaking in the API? Any class or method signature changed?
None that I could spot, the search IME action button was previously unused.

📝 How to test

Is there a special case to test your changes?
Just follow the video example

🔮 Next steps

Do we have to plan something else after the merge?
None currently, thanks!

@vbuberen
Copy link
Collaborator

vbuberen commented Jan 21, 2020

Hey @kmayoral
Thanks for your contribution.
However, in #151 you set a checkbox that you don't want to develop it.
From my point of view it is not the best way to iterate through search results.
The keyboard "steals" too much space of the screen and covers lots of response content. So I am for IME action Done for this particular case.

I also started my implementation recently. But in my case I am doing like it is done in Chrome browser - with an additional view to show amount of results and buttons to navigate (will attach a screenshot below).
If you would like, I would gladly hand over this feature to you, so you could implement it that way. If no, I am going to finish it pretty soon, but don't want to include into 3.1.0, since we already have pretty serious amount of changes there.

@vbuberen
Copy link
Collaborator

Here is what I meant when mentioned Chrome browser.
search_example

@kmayoral kmayoral force-pushed the km/improvement/search_iteration branch from b7b260f to b635888 Compare January 21, 2020 17:51
@kmayoral
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hi @vbuberen, I definitely prefer your approach as well, I was just moving with a quick solution to unblock my current use case. I'm happy to let you continue with your development on your solution and will close this PR for now. Thanks for this great product!

@kmayoral kmayoral closed this Jan 21, 2020
@kmayoral kmayoral deleted the km/improvement/search_iteration branch January 21, 2020 17:55
@vbuberen
Copy link
Collaborator

Thanks for you feature suggestion :)

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants