Re: Too many editor tabs?

Ivan Soleimanipour wrote:
> It seems to me the view is unneccessary.
> Why not just have a "close ephemeral files" action? It's simpler.

The user usually don't look for the actions. It is simpler only for 
someone who knows it is there.

> My main concern is that the user will have to remember something about views
> or make a decision based on views. For example if each view had an LRU
> list of it's own that would be bad because the user would have to guess
> which views LRU lists to use. Or if they have their own independent tabs.
> 
> Here how user can get confused ...
> 
> Suppose one opened a permanent file. It will be in the permanent
> view. Then a long time passes, the user sleeps. Next day they debug and
> step into the same file. It will already be open in the permanent view.
> But the user only remembers stepping into it and their STM will say
> this file is open in the temporary view. 

> if they need it again they will
> go looking for it there and not find it.

What? The user can always see only one editor area. If the file was 
already opened (permanently) it will stay opened. If (s)he steps into 
with the debugger (s)he will see it (at the very same place as all other 
editors). Only some visual indicator will be different. But by stepping 
in debugger the user will not search for the file because the debugger 
will bring it to the front. After closing the debugger the previously 
opened editor will stay opened.

So when exactly will the user try to search for the file?

> In other words it will be hard for a user to in general predict which
> view a file is in.

The point is that there should be only very few items permanently opened 
  - visible in the current tabs area, all visible at the same time. If 
it is not there the file might be in the temp area where you have to 
scroll something to see it.

> I asked my earlier question about opening a file to put a bpt because
> I believe the user switches between activities, debugging vs something else,
> and that it makes more sense to associate filse with an activity 
> as opposed to what I'd claim is randomness.

It is not random: the distinction is quite clear:

1. The user "opened" file
2. The IDE opened the file automagically

Seems like a clear distinction at least to me. But I am in no way a GUI 
expert.

> That's why I drew the two diagrams to stress that there is a"debugging
> activity".

On the contrary: switching activities is something very unnatural IMHO. 
The user debugs and at the same time tries to edit/search for other 
stuff. During your debug session the user is doing a lot of things ...

I think this discussion does not lead anywhere. I propose to create a 
bunch of prototypes and then check what works the best. I have already 
started with this: see my module mentioned at the very start of this 
thread. I don't claim it is perfect, just demonstrates one possible idea.

Best regards,

David