cakeasfen.blogg.se

1. WINDOWS PAGICO SYNC FOLDER INSTEAD OF IMPORTING HOW TO
2. WINDOWS PAGICO SYNC FOLDER INSTEAD OF IMPORTING MANUAL

WINDOWS PAGICO SYNC FOLDER INSTEAD OF IMPORTING HOW TO

Educating users, most of whom wont use the word “taxonomy” in daily life, how to use a tool supporting a model with an almost inherent self-contraction seems like a mammoth task. Structure and unstructure are basically opposed so making a single UI work for both seems problematic. Tagging systems typically emphasise (through UI and explanatory notes) the unstructured approach. Tag hierarchies are a specialised use, or extension of generalised tags. I have yet to see a tagging interface work as well for tag hierarchies as a directory tree works. The structure could be encoded as tags, with all the files dumped in a single directory. It forms a “silent” background context against which all entity-based decisions get made. It helps new colleagues learn the application structure and it helps old hands get to what they want faster. The tree (and its node namez) gives me sections of the app, collections of entity types, and hints how they’re connected. I also use the file tree, because important and meaningful application structure is encoded in the tree. increasingly using VSCode’s “find references”, which already operates by entity name (at least that’s now the UI appears) This matches by file ame, but feasibly could operate by entity symbolic name to the same effect I navigate my codebase at work primarily using the name of the entity I’m aiming to inspect or work on next (e.g. Here’s some loose thoughts, just to get into the problem space. I’m still largely pro-file-systems, but your comment made me think. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but the versatility of `find` is far more powerful if you actually need to handle/sort through that many files, and something like `fzf` probably curtails all these complaints in the first place. What use would that be anyway? I'm not going to read a list like that - I'm going to operate on it. Or the need to produce a list of 20 million images in 2 seconds. Nor do I see a reasonable way to use a whole host of powerful unix techniques with a whackadoodle tiny tags filesystem. Moreover, I just don't have the problem of searching for filename fragments to begin with. If I do ever need to actually search for something, it will be constrained to a narrow subset of directories and ignore the other 199.9 million files or whatever. I simply use a bit of discipline organizing the directory structure(s). I rarely waste effort trying to remember filenames in the first place, much less needing some expensive tag curation to locate files. How is that cheaper than current indexers (which all seem to work fine btw)?

WINDOWS PAGICO SYNC FOLDER INSTEAD OF IMPORTING MANUAL

Manual curation?! Automatically derived by file extension? file headers? what is the cost of opening a file, parsing its filetype, comparing against a reference, writing it to a database, etc. Reading this article left me wondering just where the 200 million tags this guy needs are supposed to come from.