Re: [gcmd-dev] [NEW] Advrename on steroids

[Piotr Eljasiak]

> >     regex: '\b(\w)(\w*)\b'   replace: '\u\1\L\2\E'
> 
> Does this work for you ? For example with 'This is a Long Foo' -> 
> 'ThisIsALongFoo' ?

Typo fix:       regex:  ' *\b(\w)(\w*)\b'

that finally gives 'This is a Long Foo' -> 'ThisIsALongFoo' replacement


> > CamelCase -> long file name
> > 
> >     regex: '\p{Lu}'   replace: ' \l\0'

> Gives here: ThisIsALongFoo -> thisisalongfoo which is basically ok but
> it does not insert spaces.

This one works for me - have you added space in the replacement?

GLib regexes (those fancy \p{Lu} or \w) are supported since glib-2.14 -
do you have the right version?


> By the way, is it correct the regex list is worked top down ? But when comes 
> the space remover into play ? (Like, when i want to remove spaces first and 
> only afterwards apply another replacing) ?

advrename uses 4 steps for getting the new file name:

        1. template
        2. regexes (top -> bottom)
        3. case conversion
        4. blank trimming

If you want to remove blanks first, you need using regexes


> > IMHO the best approach here is to implement support for storing/loading
> > advrename settings - this way there'd be convenient way for defining
> > by user its own rename schemas.
> 
> Yes, profiles, that would be great, since there always are some complex 
> operations for different cases. In fact, i'm repeating typing them in over 
> and over again.

I've just started work on profiles ;o)


> > > Somehow i seem to see ctime instead, or at least it's not updated
> > after
> > > 'apply'.
> > 
> > You're right, this is the same as in gcmd file list. I meant ctime.
> 
> How about mtime instead ? Gives you additional feedback for rename success.

Hmmm, I am not convinced - the information should be given the same as
in main window.


> > > How about access to intview (F3), in case you like to check if some
> > > image file really is what you think it is...yes you can do that in the
> > > main window but then have to throw away toe selection.
> > 
> > Good idea - added to context menu as rev. 2286. I haven't assigned F3,
> > as it'd be working only for focused file result.
> 
> that's ok. But i don't understand why F3 on focussed (selected) would be 
> wrong. I mean, it's just like we are used to how F3 works, no ?

It is not wrong, but IMO it can a bit misleading why sometimes F3 works
and the other - not...


> > That's not that easy. Basically speaking - gcmd doesn't know if the
> > rename will be successful unless it tries (eg. read-only mounts or file
> > systems not case-aware). 
> 
> I see your point. Hmmm, let's call the feature i'm proposing rather 'preview 
> verification' instead of 'success control'. A virtual success indicator, that 
> is.
> 
> 
> And i think we don't need to consider any unusual filesystem condition in the 
> first place, and there always will be the final result feedback as is.
> In case of a readonly filesystem, there should be an error message anyway.
> Case-unaware filesystems ? Dunno anyone. Well, some old DOS have filename 
> length restriction. But hey you can't always deal with any bordercase.

Windows FAT: one can't rename FiLe.ExT -> file.ext

> > Moreover, there even are some renames that
> > COULD be perfectly performed, but gcmd can't resolve it automatically,
> > like:
> > 
> >     file1 -> file2
> >     file2 -> file3
> >     file3 -> file4
> 
> That's the reason i like the idea of preview verification. You could for 
> example drag and drop around until it works. Another idea is to repeat the 
> operation on the failures in a second run, to see if it would work now.

But the verification will be based on checking duplicates in the same
dir - and this is not the case...


> If there's no preview verification, then another thing could be useful: 
> Reverting.

Agreed, added Undo button to advrename TODO list


> I'm sorry i'm again asking only for features (instead of doing something 
> useful); i hope you know i'm ok with anything you can offer, in any way.

That's ok - it's good to discuss with somebody else (not that biased as
me ;o)



Piotr