8000 fix(fzf-lua): ordering of messages in fzf by sufftea · Pull Request #1038 · folke/noice.nvim · GitHub
[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
Skip to content

fix(fzf-lua): ordering of messages in fzf #1038

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

fix(fzf-lua): ordering of messages in fzf #1038

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

sufftea
Copy link
@sufftea sufftea commented Jan 15, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Description

Message entries shown in fzf weren't sorted correctly.

Even though the messages are sorted initially, the order is broken when they are moved to ret:

  ---@type table<number, NoiceEntry>
  local ret = {}

  for _, message in ipairs(messages) do
    ret[message.id] = M.entry(message)
  end

I made find return a sorted li 8000 st of NoiceEntry, and moved the part where the id to message map is created into open.

Related Issue(s)

I mentioned this problem in #1037, but this PR doesn't solve the main issue (yet)

@sufftea sufftea changed the title Fix: ordering of messages in fzf fix: ordering of messages in fzf Jan 15, 2025
@sufftea sufftea changed the title fix: ordering of messages in fzf fix(fzf-lua): ordering of messages in fzf Jan 15, 2025
@github-actions GitHub Actions
Copy link
Contributor

This PR is stale because it has been open 30 days with no activity.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the stale label Feb 16, 2025
@sufftea
Copy link
Author
sufftea commented Feb 16, 2025

Rebased and fixed conflicts.

PS: I've created two PRs for a single file, because one of them (this one) is an obvious bug fix, while another (#1041) introduces a new feature, and I don't know how you deal with that (maybe it needs to be discussed first or something?). But I just noticed they conflict with each other. I guess I could combine them into one if that would make it easier?

@github-actions github-actions bot removed the stale label Feb 17, 2025
@github-actions GitHub Actions
Copy link
Contributor

This PR is stale because it has been open 30 days with no activity.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the stale label Mar 19, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers
No reviews
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
stale
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
1 participant
@sufftea
0