Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Fuzzy Finder vs CtrlP

Expand Messages
  • Jeroen Budts
    ... As far as I know there is no exact matching. There is however regex-matching, which does nearly the same. If you enable regex matching, for example by
    Message 1 of 14 , Feb 5, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      On 02/06/2012 12:03 AM, Michael Ludwig wrote:
      > Michael Ludwig schrieb am 05.02.2012 um 22:57 (+0100):
      >
      >> What a great Vim extension!
      >
      > [Re: Fuzzy Finder vs CtrlP]
      >
      > What would you use if you didn't need or want the fuzziness of the
      > matching because you found exact matching on filenames or directory
      > names more useful?
      >
      > I've read the CtrlP manual, and while there are many options to
      > configure things there does not see to be one to switch from fuzzy
      > to exact matching.
      >
      As far as I know there is no exact matching. There is however
      regex-matching, which does nearly the same. If you enable regex
      matching, for example by pressing ctrl-r while the ctrlp window is open,
      you can just start typing and it will only give you exact matches,
      unless ofcourse, you use special 'regex-characters'. However, I found
      that it can become rather slow on large trees.

      Jeroen


      --
      website: http://budts.be/ - twitter: @teranex
      ___________________________________
      Registered Linux User #482240 - GetFirefox.com - ubuntu.com

      --
      You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist.
      Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
      For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
    • Tim Gray
      ... Me too. I m not sure if I ll end up using it over Command-T (or Peepopen), but I am going to play around with it and see how it goes. -- You received this
      Message 2 of 14 , Feb 5, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        On Feb 05, 2012 at 10:52 PM +0100, Michael Ludwig wrote:
        >Just discoved CtrlP through your message. Looks just great.

        Me too. I'm not sure if I'll end up using it over Command-T (or
        Peepopen), but I am going to play around with it and see how it goes.

        --
        You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist.
        Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
        For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
      • pansz
        ... In Oct. 2011, I ve tried FuzzyFinder, CtrlP, CtrlT, Peepopen and several other plaugins and found FuzzyFinder suits me best. YMMV. Well, CtrlP released its
        Message 3 of 14 , Feb 5, 2012
        • 0 Attachment
          On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Chris Lott <chris@...> wrote:
          > Has anyone used Fuzzy Finder and CTRLP enough to have thoughts on
          > which one might be preferable? They seem quite similar, but I might be
          > missing something that will come back to haunt me later :)

          In Oct. 2011, I've tried FuzzyFinder, CtrlP, CtrlT, Peepopen and
          several other plaugins and found FuzzyFinder suits me best. YMMV.

          Well, CtrlP released its first version in Oct. 2011. So, things might
          have changed, and CtrlP may be a true competitor or even surpass
          fuzzyfinder now.

          --
          You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist.
          Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
          For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
        • Michael Ludwig
          ... It seems this fuzzy matching is part of a new-fuzzled definition of usability. Here s an excerpt from the Command-T homepage: To search efficiently,
          Message 4 of 14 , Feb 5, 2012
          • 0 Attachment
            Tim Gray schrieb am 05.02.2012 um 19:45 (-0500):
            > On Feb 05, 2012 at 10:52 PM +0100, Michael Ludwig wrote:
            > >Just discoved CtrlP through your message. Looks just great.
            >
            > Me too. I'm not sure if I'll end up using it over Command-T (or
            > Peepopen), but I am going to play around with it and see how it
            > goes.

            It seems this fuzzy matching is part of a new-fuzzled definition of
            usability. Here's an excerpt from the Command-T homepage:

            To search efficiently, especially in large projects, you should
            adopt a "path-centric" rather than a "filename-centric" mentality.
            That is you should think more about where the desired file is
            found rather than what it is called. This means narrowing your
            search down by including some characters from the upper path
            components rather than just entering characters from the filename
            itself. -- https://github.com/wincent/Command-T

            Does that work well for you? Maybe for project where all files have the
            same names because some framework favors Convention Over Configuration?

            I guess most humans find it easier to remember words or part of words
            instead of "some characters from the upper path components".

            Michael

            --
            You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist.
            Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
            For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
          • Michael Ludwig
            ... The screencast Live demonstration from [1] confirms this suspicion. [1] https://wincent.com/products/command-t CtrlP and Command-T seem close in terms of
            Message 5 of 14 , Feb 5, 2012
            • 0 Attachment
              Michael Ludwig schrieb am 06.02.2012 um 02:56 (+0100):

              > Here's an excerpt from the Command-T homepage:
              >
              > To search efficiently, especially in large projects, you should
              > adopt a "path-centric" rather than a "filename-centric" mentality.
              > That is you should think more about where the desired file is
              > found rather than what it is called. This means narrowing your
              > search down by including some characters from the upper path
              > components rather than just entering characters from the filename
              > itself. -- https://github.com/wincent/Command-T
              >
              > Does that work well for you? Maybe for project where all files have the
              > same names because some framework favors Convention Over Configuration?

              The screencast "Live demonstration" from [1] confirms this suspicion.

              [1] https://wincent.com/products/command-t

              CtrlP and Command-T seem close in terms of functionality. One point in
              favour of CtrlP: It's in VimL where Command-T is in Ruby.

              Michael

              --
              You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist.
              Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
              For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
            • pansz
              Ctrl-P works well only when project root found. i.e. when you are editing from .hg, .svn, .git repositories. When Ctrl-P starts in a non-SCM-controled
              Message 6 of 14 , Feb 5, 2012
              • 0 Attachment
                Ctrl-P works well only when project root found. i.e. when you are
                editing from .hg, .svn, .git repositories.

                When Ctrl-P starts in a non-SCM-controled directory, it starts very
                slow (because it tries to read all files). For example, try cd /etc
                and then use vim ctrlp...

                If you do never start vim outside your project, Ctrl-P is better than
                fuzzyfinder.

                On Sun, Feb 5, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Chris Lott <chris@...> wrote:
                > Has anyone used Fuzzy Finder and CTRLP enough to have thoughts on
                > which one might be preferable? They seem quite similar, but I might be
                > missing something that will come back to haunt me later :)

                --
                You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist.
                Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
                For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
              • Michael Ludwig
                ... It should measure the depth of the sea before attempting to dive to the bottom. There are some options giving you control, though: The maximum number of
                Message 7 of 14 , Feb 6, 2012
                • 0 Attachment
                  pansz schrieb am 06.02.2012 um 11:31 (+0800):
                  > Ctrl-P works well only when project root found. i.e. when you are
                  > editing from .hg, .svn, .git repositories.
                  >
                  > When Ctrl-P starts in a non-SCM-controled directory, it starts very
                  > slow (because it tries to read all files). For example, try cd /etc
                  > and then use vim ctrlp...

                  It should measure the depth of the sea before attempting to dive to the
                  bottom. There are some options giving you control, though:

                  The maximum number of files to scan, set to 0 for no limit:
                  let g:ctrlp_max_files = 10000

                  The maximum depth of a directory tree to recurse into:
                  let g:ctrlp_max_depth = 40

                  Specify an external tool to use for listing files instead of using
                  Vim’s |globpath()|. Use %s in place of the target directory:
                  let g:ctrlp_user_command = ''

                  :help 'ctrlp'
                  --
                  Michael

                  --
                  You received this message from the "vim_use" maillist.
                  Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to.
                  For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.