Could anyone check this code and apply to SVN?

---
diff --git a/ide/procedurelist.pas b/ide/procedurelist.pas
index 9e578af..96d8ba9 100644
--- a/ide/procedurelist.pas
+++ b/ide/procedurelist.pas
@@ -431,7 +431,8 @@ begin
       end;
     end;
   finally
-    cbObjects.ItemIndex := 0;   // select <All> as the default
+    { select <All> as the default }
+    cbObjects.ItemIndex := cbObjects.Items.IndexOf(lisPListAll);
     if cbObjects.Text = '' then
       cbObjects.ItemIndex := 1;
   end;

---

It solved the default item selected on bug on Procedure List. Default selection should be 'All' at local language, but before this change, the selection was allways the first item at list, at english is not a problem, because 'All' usually is the first item at list, but at other languages, like spanish: 'Todo' usually isn't the first this modification the default item will be allways 'All' in local language, solving that bug.

Cheers,
Raul Ferriz

__________ Informaci?n de ESET NOD32 Antivirus, versi?n de la base de firmas de virus 4550 (20091028) __________

ESET NOD32 Antivirus ha comprobado este mensaje.

http://www.eset.com

Raistware wrote

Could anyone check this code and apply to SVN?

Sorry Raistware, I don't have write access to the repository, so was hoping somebody else would have picked up on your supplied patch from before.

I created a bug report with the supplied patch - so hopefully now somebody will submit it. Thanks again for solving the problem.

Patch supplied in following bug report.

http://bugs.freepascal.org/view.php?id=14923

(...)

Wouldn't the proper fix be always inserting "All" at the first position?

-Fl?vio

Fl?vio Etrusco escribi?:

I see no other fix applied ... wich revision?.
The list is sorted, and this is important and desirable while searching for the proper class. So 'All' in all languages aren't at first position.

Anyone can think that disable sorting after inserted all classes and then insert at first positions 'All' and 'None' ... well, that gives lot of more work, and I don't like that solution.

__________ Informaci?n de ESET NOD32 Antivirus, versi?n de la base de firmas de virus 4551 (20091028) __________

ESET NOD32 Antivirus ha comprobado este mensaje.

http://www.eset.com

It has not yet been applied. There is no clear consension about the solution yet ;-)

Vincent

Anyone can think that disable sorting after inserted all classes and then insert at first positions 'All' and 'None' ... well, that gives lot of more work, and I don't like that solution.

'-- all --' would automatically sort as the first entry, also indicating that it is a synthetic entry.

DoDi

A much better idea (imho) would be, to add "all" and "none" *after sorting finished.

that way you would not rely on the name of them or anything like that.

  cbObjects.Sorted := true;
  cbObjects.Sorted := false;
  cbObjects.Items.Insert(0, lisPListAll);
  cbObjects.Items.Insert(1, lisPListNone);

2009/10/28 Hans-Peter Diettrich :

'-- all --' would automatically sort as the first entry, also indicating that it is a synthetic entry.

I though that is exactly what '<all>' and '<none>' does as well. Was the non-english translations done correctly? Do the translations also include the '<' and '>' characters? Those extra characters are meant as an indicator that they are not actual classes in the unit.

Graeme Geldenhuys escribi?:

Spanish tranlation are : '<None>' -> 'Ninguno' (wrong translation, should be '<Ninguno>'), '<All>' -> '<Todo>'. But they are sorted as if they didn't have the '<' character. For instance:
Ninguno
TEquipment
<Todo>
TPlayer

If you want that the sort where:
<Todo>
<Ninguno> (after correct translation)
TEquipment
TPlayer

Then the easiest process to accomplish that is inserting '<All>' and '<None>' after the classes methods, and before that disable sorting.

Cheers,
Raul Ferriz
I don't have that patch, for me the order of All and None is irrelevant, because my units tend to have very little methods. The only must have to me was selecting All by default at my local language, and that was easily achieved.

__________ Informaci?n de ESET NOD32 Antivirus, versi?n de la base de firmas de virus 4553 (20091028) __________

ESET NOD32 Antivirus ha comprobado este mensaje.

http://www.eset.com

Martin escribi?:

Oops, see this message after sending my own :D.
But yes that is the solution if you want that first items All and None.

__________ Informaci?n de ESET NOD32 Antivirus, versi?n de la base de firmas de virus 4553 (20091028) __________

ESET NOD32 Antivirus ha comprobado este mensaje.

http://www.eset.com

Raistware wrote

Spanish tranlation are : '<None>' -> 'Ninguno' (wrong translation, should

OK, that is a translation problem then and needs to be fixed.

be '<Ninguno>'), '<All>' -> '<Todo>'. But they are sorted as if they didn't have the '<' character. For instance:

This seems like a bug in sorting algorithm. I'll double check what Unicode.org says about sorting with '<' characters and language text. I'll raise this issue as a new topic in Lazarus mailing list as well.

was selecting All by default at my local language, and that was easily achieved.

OK, what I am going to is create a new patch. My original intention was that <All> and <None> are the first to options in the combobox. (I completely forgot about possible translation issue at the time I implemented it) So I will add all classes and sort them. Then only insert <All> and <None> items at the beginning. This should then work for all languages.

I'll submit the patch later today, so hopefully soon it will be in Lazarus repository.

What about using '<'+resoucestring+'>'?

Mattias

That's only a tedious workaround but if you later add something to your list you would have to remove the first element, set "Sorted" true and back to false, then add the first element again. Not an elegant solution.

I would have expected that a method exists that takes the first and last index and then sorts between these borders. Would be much more flexible than this strict sort-all-or-nothing flag.

J?rgen Hestermann wrote

That's only a tedious workaround but if you later add something to your list you would have to remove the first element, set "Sorted" true and back to false, then add the first element again. Not an elegant solution.

That should never be an issue. Every time you use Procedure List, the combobox is populated from scratch using information retrieved from CodeTools. If the Procedure List window is close, everything is cleared and free.

So where exactly would "adding things later" occur?

Oh yes. I have not read the details. I just had in mind what I experienced with StringLists where it seems that you also have to do such workarounds. Ok, in this case my objection may not be valid. It was meant for list sorting in a more general way (especially StringLists).