[559] Show scopes if no results are found #1804
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
When using filters, the previous behavior was to hide all scopes. This is counterintuitive, as a different scope from the current one may have results for the selected filter, and ends up confusing the user.
|
I prefere this behavior too. Anyone against that? |
gregbell
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 15, 2013
[559] Show scopes if no results are found
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR reverts #559 and is a half-fix for #995
Since we currently hide/remove scopes when a filter doesn't return results, it's much more difficult for the user to figure out "what went wrong" with their query. If they can see that all available scopes are reporting 0 records for the query, they know with a much higher degree of certainty that there truly is nothing to find. What's worse, since the scopes are currently hidden, there would be no way to know if there were results in other scopes!
This PR is tangentially related to #1532. I intend to implement "minimap" of sorts to explicitly tell the user how their result set has been refined:
