[texworks] Tag Window / Find Results only one click works

[Paul A Norman]

Have done, and noted this as well:

This work around  of course does not work at all if you are doing a
find which has only found one item having selected 'Find all
occurances'

You have to actually redo the whole find again.

<programmer's babbling>
Even double clicking does not work
</programmer's babbling>

Paul

On 15 October 2010 23:38, Paul A Norman <paul.a.norman at gmail.com> wrote:
> will do
>
> On 15 October 2010 22:11, Stefan Löffler <st.loeffler at gmail.com> wrote:
>>  Hi,
>>
>> Am 2010-10-15 04:52, schrieb Paul A Norman:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> When using the Tag Window to display %: Comments
>>>
>>> Or the Find Results on 'Find all occurances'
>>>
>>> And you click on a listed entry, nicely the editor jumps to the related portion.
>>>
>>> If while you are in the editor you then move around up or down in the
>>> document using mouse or keybopard, and wish to retyurn to the
>>> previously clicked tag or find result (now showing as grey/not
>>> highlighted as it has lost the focus) clicking on the same tag or find
>>> result re-highlights it, but the eidotr does not jump back to the
>>> related position.
>>
>> Hm, yeah, I see how this can be confusing.
>> <programmer's babbling>
>> >From the programming POV, it is quite obvious, since there is a
>> difference between selecting and entry of the list and focusing the
>> widget. In principle, this should be quite easy to handle by connecting
>> to some onFocus signal. However, we have to take care that this only
>> happens if the user indeed clicks on the item while focusing, otherwise
>> the view would also jump when using the keyboard to focus, or clicking
>> somewhere else (unless a selectionChange signal is triggered, then)...
>> </programmer's babbling>
>>
>>> Intutively clicking back on the now greyed out tag or find result
>>> should take you back in the editor to what it is connected to?
>>>
>>> I've glanced thorugh
>>> http://code.google.com/p/texworks/issues/detail?id=6 but it does not
>>> seem to be covered there.
>>> Is this worth me putting in an addition to that issue? Or maiking a new one?
>>
>> I guess making a new one would make life easiest for us.
>>
>> HTH
>> Stefan
>>
>