Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Request for Dynamic Fuzz Search Toggle Within Search Interface #402

Open
theSprog opened this issue Mar 5, 2024 · 1 comment
Open

Request for Dynamic Fuzz Search Toggle Within Search Interface #402

theSprog opened this issue Mar 5, 2024 · 1 comment

Comments

@theSprog
Copy link

theSprog commented Mar 5, 2024

Hello McFly Team,

I'm an avid user of McFly, and I greatly appreciate the enhancements it brings to navigating command history. Its fuzz search capability is particularly useful for finding commands when I can't recall the exact content. However, I've encountered a scenario where the current implementation of fuzz search, controlled globally by an environment variable, can sometimes be limiting.

Feature Request:

I would like to propose a feature that allows users to dynamically toggle fuzz search on and off directly from the search interface. This would provide flexibility, enabling users to switch between exact and fuzz search modes on the fly, depending on the specificity or generality of their current search needs.

Suggested Implementation:

Introduce a shortcut key (e.g., alt + f) within the search interface that toggles fuzz search for the current session or query.
Upon toggling, the search mode indicator could be updated (if any) to reflect the current mode—fuzz or exact.
This change would not affect the global setting controlled by the environment variable but offer a temporary switch for the user's immediate convenience.

Thank you for considering this feature request. I believe many users would benefit from this added flexibility, and it would make McFly an even more indispensable tool for command line efficiency.

@cantino
Copy link
Owner

cantino commented Apr 29, 2024

I'd be supportive of a PR for this.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants