Add original index field to fuzzy search result#105930
Merged
Merged
Conversation
akien-mga
approved these changes
Apr 30, 2025
Member
akien-mga
left a comment
akien-mga
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Seems fine in the context of the two linked PRs that would use it.
Contributor
|
Thanks! |
This was referenced May 26, 2025
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Very simple pr to track the original index within the targets array of a given fuzzy search result. This is useful as typically there is other data associated with whatever is being searched against and without this new field it's required to build a path to data mapping. Specifically, see #105239 and #105240.
I briefly looked into applying this new field to the current use case of the quick open dialog but it would require reworking how history is incorporated into the results so I didn't think it was worth it. Hypothetically it would be a tiny bit faster to do so as it would replace a few hash lookups with indexed lookups.