3 votesDavid shared this idea ·
Since posting my last comment, it occurs to me that there are many colorings that are done only when there is no cursor on that piece of text, so, while my original suggestion (and similar to what others have mentioned) would work most of the time, it cannot work all the time. For inactive-only items, we would to do something else like...
1) mark a section as something we are interested in, then record all the highlights that happen to that section over a given period of time
2) put the editor in a state that we are interested in and then issue a command to "freeze" colors. Once colorings are set, we can THEN select the piece are interested in.
... or something similar
I would like to select some text or place my cursor somewhere in the editor. Then, when I go to Options -> Environment -> Fonts and Colors, I would like to see a new check box that allows me to show ONLY the things that are active within my selection / under my cursor. I don't care if "Plain Text", "Selected Text", and/or "Inactive Selected Text" show up in that list or not.
Hi thanks for your votes and survey responses. We’ve closed down the survey now and are looking into options that would solve the underlying need that you’ve presented to us. However, due to prioritization of work, we will not be able to release this exact feature in a future update.
The column thing didn't work--let me try again:
Tab1 | Tab2.....................Tab7 | Tab8.................Tab12
Tab3 | Tab4 | Tab 5
Tab6................................Tab9 | Tab10 | Tab11
A) Yes, absolutely
B) No. I see this as more of a manual grouping so there does not need to be a setting anywhere; If I say to move a tab up to the next row, VS adds a row regardless of how many we already have.
C) One set per solution
Bonus: being able to further group tabs would still be nice. A simple way to do this would be right-clicking on the tab and manually designating a color. An even better way (and you *could* do both) would be to define boundaries in the document well to group tabs into columns (or you could think of it as boxes). Below is an example of how "tab columns" may appear (assuming the formatting is not changed once I post):
Tab1 | Tab2 Tab7 | Tab8 Tab12
Tab3 | Tab4 | Tab 5
Tab6 Tab9 | Tab10 | Tab11
The most important thing is that we need to be able to have manual control over how these groupings are defined. I see value in being able to set up rules to automatically group tabs, but I want to be able to manually override any automatic groupings and put things where they make sense in my own twisted mind at that particular moment.
In that same vein, note that the columns don't just appear because of space optimization--they are the result of me explicitly requesting a new column. The boundaries between columns could be fixed or elastic based on content, but I'm the one who decides what goes where.
I've tried "Tabs Studio" and it's pretty good, but has its own set of limitations.
I'd love to see VS allow us to define the number tab rows. In 2013 we can pin the tabs and thus get 2 rows, but why stop at 2? I'd like to organize my tabs by grouping similar ones in their own rows. In my current project, I'd like 5 rows with between 1 and 8 tabs per row and I would like to drag and drop them to have them in the order I want.
Hi Supporters of Data Breakpoints for C#!
I am currently looking into this suggestion to investigate what the possibilities for this could be. Please take this short survey (https://www.research.net/r/DataBreakpoints1) to help me know more specifically how C# Data Breakpoints will help you in your development process.
Looking forward to hearing from you,
While I agree this is a cool idea and I would probably use it at some point or another, I feel compelled to point out that simply using a "setter" and putting a breakpoint in there would accomplish the same thing (assumes you have control over the code you are trying to watch).
I like this. Here is yet another suggestion on the same line...
as far as I'm aware, you can't do the following:
public void DoSomething<T>() where T : Nullable
public void DoSomething<T>() where T : NOT(Nullable)
or somehow specify that T can (or cannot) be null. Recently I wanted to allow an "int?", or "long?" or "double?" (etc.) but not an "int", "long", or "double" but couldn't figure out how to do this. You CAN do this:
public void DoSomething<T>() where T : class
but that's not quite the same thing.