Search++: A work in progress

Coises

@guy038 said in Search++: A work in progress:

You said :

This does make me think I should probably have an option, perhaps enabled by default, to return focus to the document automatically after a select operation, since wanting to copy is probably the most common reason for using select.

Yes indeed; this would make sense !

[…]

BTW, @coises, why didn’t you choose a single shortcut ( I’m thinking about Ctrl + H ) to toggle between the Search++ plugin and the Search++ Results ?

A few small improvements are in version 0.4:

Add wide layout for better top/bottom docking. Improve layout handling and make sure non-docking dialogs aren’t sized too small.
Add settings (checked by default) to focus the document after Select commands and after Show commands. (See help.)
Make behavior of general navigation commands (Ctrl/Ctrl+Shift + H/N/O) more consistent. (See help.)

Lachlanmax

Nice work so far. Notepad++ already has a solid search system, so making something which actually feels like an upgrade is not small thing.

What is standing out to me is that it follows the way heavy N++ users already search instead of trying to force whole new workflow. The extra scope control feels especially useful when you start doing repeated searches in same session, because built-in search can get a bit messy.

One thing I personally really miss is Find + Mark (highlight/coloring results) style workflow. Being able to keep visual marks in document while refining searches is something I use very often in native N++, so having similar option here would make it even stronger. Related to that, I also really love Bookmark option in native N++, which I am not sure is used regularly by everyone, but to me it is very helpful, being able to quickly jump between important lines makes managing large documents much easier.

It would also be very nice to see these strong features later applied to Find in Files / Find in Directory, like Notepad++ handles it now, because that is where extra scope logic and result control could become even more useful.

Hopefully I will be able to contribute something useful to this community soon also.

guy038

Hello, @coises and All,

Many thanks for your reactivity and for the Search++-04 release ! I do appreciate that you always keep the Help file up to date with the latest version and it’s a pleasure to consult it !

Bravo for the Keyboard navigation section, within the Help file and for the Focus section in the Settings dialog with their default values !

Regarding updating the Find dialog when selecting something new in a document :

In your last post, I did not notice that you spoke about the Ctrl + I shortcut. So, presently, in order to update the Find region of Search++ with current selection of current document, we have two possibilites, when Search++ is on focus :

Use the Ctrl + I or the combination Ctrl + A + Ctrl + I

or

Use the Ctrl + Shift + N shortcut to close Search++ ( Search++ shortcut )
Re-use the Ctrl + Shift + N shortcut to open again Search++ ( User shortcut )

BTW, @coises, the Help file did not mention at all that Ctrl + I shortcut !

Best Regards,

guy038

Coises

@guy038 said in Search++: A work in progress:

In your last post, I did not notice that you spoke about the Ctrl + I shortcut. So, presently, in order to update the Find region of Search++ with current selection of current document, we have two possibilites, when Search++ is on focus :

Use the Ctrl + I or the combination Ctrl + A + Ctrl + I

or

Use the Ctrl + Shift + N shortcut to close Search++ ( Search++ shortcut )

Re-use the Ctrl + Shift + N shortcut to open again Search++ ( User shortcut )

BTW, @coises, the Help file did not mention at all that Ctrl + I shortcut !

Thank you again for looking at this so closely.

The help file mentions in this section that there is a context menu on which you can also find keyboard shortcuts:

Right-click in the Find or Replace box, or use the Apps key or Shift+F10, to bring up a context menu. A number of useful commands can be found there, along with their keyboard shortcuts. The bottom section of the context menu lets you select from a history of the last ten strings you have used for searches.

I go on to mention wrapping and zooming, but I never describe the Insert/Exchange sub-menu.

in order to update the Find region of Search++ with current selection of current document, we have two possibilites, when Search++ is on focus

There are already settings to choose whether to fill the find box at all, and if you choose to fill, to set some limits on how big the selection can be.

Do you now think:

there should be another sub-setting for whether or not to replace the contents of the find box when you use the Search++ Search… menu command or the shortcut you’ve set for it to move focus from the document to a search dialog that is already visible? (If so, should it be default checked?)
if the main “Fill” box is checked, it should always fill when you use the command/shortcut, regardless of whether the dialog is visible — if someone doesn’t like it, they can just turn off filling altogether (it’s not that hard to use Ctrl+I when you want it)?
it should stay like it is (it’s not that hard to use Ctrl+I when you want it)?

My personal feeling is that it would be disconcerting to have what is in the Find field, in a visible dialog, replaced just because I used my keyboard shortcut to navigate to the dialog instead of activating it with the mouse. (If I’ve closed the dialog I probably don’t remember what was in it anyway, so the selected text is as good as anything.) Others might not see it that way — I rarely use auto-fill intentionally. Most often I’m not already looking at the thing I want to find; so just unchecking the box and turning it off completely wouldn’t affect me much.

Coises

@Lachlanmax said in Search++: A work in progress:

Nice work so far. Notepad++ already has a solid search system, so making something which actually feels like an upgrade is not small thing.

Thank you.

One thing I personally really miss is Find + Mark (highlight/coloring results) style workflow. Being able to keep visual marks in document while refining searches is something I use very often in native N++, so having similar option here would make it even stronger.

Would you help me understand what is missing? I assume you have seen the Mark command (the simple one and its family of direction- and scope-controlled commands) on the drop-down for the Find All button, and the mark-related functions on the Tools button menu. What do I need to add? Other than…

Related to that, I also really love Bookmark option in native N++, which I am not sure is used regularly by everyone, but to me it is very helpful, being able to quickly jump between important lines makes managing large documents much easier.

I did leave that out. I’m one of those people who doesn’t use them, so I have little insight into how people do use them.

I take it the essential option here is to set a bookmark on every line that contains a match when using a Mark command. Is that it?

Do you think that is something that can be a setting — that is, something a user would ordinarily either use or not use, so it can go on the Settings dialog and any given user will “set it and forget it”? Or is bookmarking the lines containing matches something a user needs to be able to turn on and off search by search?

Can bookmarks be cleared along with marked text, or do users need independent control of unmarking text and clearing bookmarks?

Should lines containing null matches (which can’t be marked, as there is no text to mark) still be bookmarked?

It would also be very nice to see these strong features later applied to Find in Files / Find in Directory, like Notepad++ handles it now, because that is where extra scope logic and result control could become even more useful.

I’m not sure I understand what this would entail.

(I haven’t yet added the ability to search in files on disk, nor the ability to search all open documents. Those are major steps I still intend to take before I consider this ready for a “stable” release.)

Are you suggesting that some sort of marked text and/or bookmarked lines be maintained in files that have never been opened in Notepad++? It sounds confusing to me; wouldn’t users be completely “flying blind” trying to assess how their searches were actually working?

I can’t help thinking that maybe complex, chained series of searches and replacements in sets of files on disk might be better handled by a separate tool (likely a command line tool which could have an optional GUI interface) that wouldn’t have anything to do with Notepad++. I don’t know if a good, user-friendly program like that exists.

guy038

Hi, @coises and All,

Regarding selection, I’m thinking about these new options in the Settings dialog :

- Selections -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

□ Fill the Find box from single selection in current document when opening the search++ dialog

□ Fill the Find box from single selection in current document when re-activating the search++ dialog

□ Fill the Find box from single selection in current document when clicking on the search++ dialog title

□ Only if the selection has no more than :  79  characters and  2  lines

□ Fill with the word containing the caret if nothing is selected

And, by default, the first and two last options would be checked

Do you think that make sense ? May be, would you prefer to merge the first 3 options in this single one :

□ Fill the Find box from single selection in current document each time the search++ dialog is invoked

Now, I tested the multi-lines text, below, pasted in a new tab :

Bla blah
This is
a test
to verify
if everything
works correctly
foo bar

Then, the search of the 5 consecutive lines, below

This is
a test
to verify
if everything
works correctly

Would select the 5 lines above, with search in Plain mode

Now, the search of the 5 consecutive lines, below

This is
a test
to verify
if everything
works correctly

OR

SEARCH This is\Ra test\Rto verify\Rif everything\Rworks correctly\R

OR

SEARCH This is\r\na test\r\nto verify\r\nif everything\r\nworks correctly\r\n

Would select the 5 lines above, with search in Regex or ICU mode

Now using this regex :

(?x)
This[ ]is         \R |
a[ ]test          \R |
to[ ]verify       \R |
if[ ]everything   \R |
works[ ]correctly \R

It would match each entire line, from 2 to 6, of the new tab, with search in Regex mode

And using this regex :

(?x)
This\ is         \R |
a\ test          \R |
to\ verify       \R |
if\ everything   \R |
works\ correctly \R

It would match each entire line, from 2 to 6, of the new tab, with search in Regex or in ICU mode.

Seemingly, brackets to enclose the space character [ ] do not work with the ICU regex engine, when using the Free-Spacing mode !?

So, all is fine, so far !!

BR

guy038

Coises

Search++ v0.5 includes various changes:

It is now possible to Count, Find All, Mark or Replace in Open Documents or in Documents in this View.

When the search dialog is narrow (typical if the docking dialog is used and docked to the left or right), the status message can overflow the available space. I added ellipsis to the message and a balloon tip on hover to show the whole message when it overflows.

I changed the default (“smart”) Mark commands so that they don’t search only within marked text when some text is marked. That search is possible (Mark in Marked text is on the Mark submenu), but it’s probably not what someone usually means to do.

I tried to make the command button drop-down menus make a little more sense. They’re probably still confusing. I updated the description in the help; hopefully if someone really wants to understand what it all means, I’ve made it possible.

Experiences, problem reports, suggestions and trauma dumps are still welcome and very much appreciated.

Still not done:

@guy038’s disappointment with the Find field not being filled from the document selection in as many situations as he expects remains to be addressed.
I haven’t looked at @Lachlanmax’s request to include bookmarking lines yet. Using marked text in multiple documents was also mentioned; the changes in 0.5 possibly address that to some extent, but only for open documents, since I haven’t added any searching of files on disk yet. I’m not sure how I could/would apply the idea of searching in marked text to documents that aren’t open in Notepad++.
When accumulating a lot of search results (tens or hundreds of thousands of hits), the search completes and then everything hangs while the results window is filled. It can be confusing and disconcerting.
The drop-down menus for the command buttons drop up when the button is near the bottom of the screen. That’s OK, except that the menu then covers the place you just clicked to open it, and if you happen to move the mouse just a pixel before you release the button, it selects the bottom item in the menu.
I still haven’t fixed the search results window for dark mode.
I still don’t have a convenient method of keyboard access to the command button drop-down menus. (I can and probably will assign some shortcuts to them, but they still won’t be discoverable to anyone who doesn’t read about them in the help.)
As @guy038 noted, the icons added to the command buttons when you shift+click to set a different primary action for the button are difficult to make out. The reason for that is that I’m using Unicode symbol characters; eventually I need to replace them with proper icons or owner-drawn buttons.
I still haven’t implemented find in files. I’m not sure yet how I will manage the user interface: I don’t want to make the main dialog bigger (I want to keep it practical for docking use).
I hope to add the ability to save searches for future use, but I haven’t done that yet.
Searching in Open Documents or in Documents in this View loses multiple selections that aren’t a rectangular selection. That’s because Notepad++ loses them when switching tabs, and I think the only safe and robust way for a plugin to access open documents is to temporarily activate them. There might be other things that are lost, too; I need to identify them and save/restore them. (Hidden lines are lost, but that’s for a different reason.)
Hidden lines as Search++ uses them don’t work together properly with hidden lines the way Notepad++ uses them. It is not clear to me yet what is possible there; I hate to give up the Show command, as it is a handy way to get the effect of a search results list but right in place, where you can edit what you see.
While there is a search progress dialog, it doesn’t always show up when it should. The biggest problem is long searches that don’t find anything. (Those are usually regular expression searches, at their worst resulting in the infamous “too complex” message.) It will be a tricky problem to solve, because the Boost.Regex engine doesn’t have any sort of callback for long operations: once I start a search, my code doesn’t get control again until it either finds something or fails to find anything. I suspect there will be no effective way to solve that without modifying Boost.Regex code.

Snabel42

@Coises I was though to mention this for 0.4, but FYI it remains in 0.5.
I’ve highlighted tha the “Mark Style” drop down appears to be populated with non-english characters, even though the remaining UI is english. When clicking the dropdown to show values, this value does not exist in the revealed list of choices

Notepad++ v8.9.3 (64-bit)
Build time: Mar 20 2026 - 00:44:25
Scintilla/Lexilla included: 5.6.0/5.4.7
Boost Regex included: 1_90
pugixml included: 1.15
nlohmann JSON included: 3.12.0
Path: C:\Program Files\Notepad++\notepad++.exe
Command Line:
Admin mode: OFF
Local Conf mode: OFF
Cloud Config: OFF
WinGUp: present
disableNppAutoUpdate.xml: absent
Periodic Backup: ON
Placeholders: ON
Scintilla Rendering Mode: SC_TECHNOLOGY_DIRECTWRITE (1)
Multi-instance Mode: monoInst
asNotepad: OFF
File Status Auto-Detection: cdEnabledNew (for current file/tab only)
Dark Mode: ON
Display Info:
primary monitor: 2560x1440, scaling 100%
visible monitors count: 2
installed Display Class adapters:
0000: Description - NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080
0000: DriverVersion - 32.0.15.9186
OS Name: Windows 11 Home (64-bit)
OS Version: 25H2
OS Build: 26200.8037
Current ANSI codepage: 1252
Plugins:
CollectionInterface (1.3)
ColumnsPlusPlus (1.3.1)
ComparePlus (2.2)
CSVLint (0.4.7)
CsvQuery (1.2.9)
FWDataViz (2.6.7)
HTMLTag (1.5.6)
HugeFiles (0.4.1)
JsonTools (8.5)
mimeTools (3.1)
MultiReplace (5.0.0.35)
NppConverter (4.7)
NppExport (0.4)
NppXmlTreeviewPlugin (2)
PythonScript (2.1)
Search++ (0.5)
XMLTools (3.1.1.13)

Coises

@Snabel42 said in Search++: A work in progress:

I’ve highlighted tha the “Mark Style” drop down appears to be populated with non-english characters, even though the remaining UI is english. When clicking the dropdown to show values, this value does not exist in the revealed list of choices

Thank you for the report and the screenshots. I couldn’t reproduce it until I changed to dark mode (to match your screenshot).

The control functions perfectly well in light mode and is completely messed up in dark mode.

I will investigate to see if I can find a cause and/or a workaround.

I have the same control in the Search dialog in Columns++, but I never added the Notepad++ message to support dark mode to anything in Columns++. The control works there, regardless of whether Notepad++ is in light or dark mode, so it seems specifically to be connected with the dialog being in dark mode.

Lachlanmax

Hi @coises,

first, I have to say I was a bit shocked when you mentioned the Mark commands under the Find All dropdown, because this is exactly what I wanted and somehow I completely did not see it when I needed it. Maybe I was simply too tired at that moment :)

So for the marking itself, yes, this already covers what I had in mind.

The main thing I was thinking about is really the bookmark workflow.

I take it the essential option here is to set a bookmark on every line that contains a match when using a Mark command. Is that it?

Yes, exactly, this is exactly what I mean.

For me this is most useful when working in larger logs or config files, where I want to quickly jump only between relevant lines after marking.

About whether this should be a setting or per-search option, I would personally prefer it per search.

Sometimes I only want visual marking to better understand the pattern and refine the next search. Other times I want the bookmarks as a temporary navigation layer through the file. Because this changes from task to task, a permanent “set and forget” setting feels a bit too static to me.

For clearing, I still think independent control makes most sense.

There are cases where the visual marks become noisy and I want to remove only them, but still keep the bookmarks for navigation. In other cases I want both gone. So separate control gives the most flexibility.

About the null matches question, I am honestly not fully sure what you mean there, so I would not want to guess wrong.

For the Find in Files / open documents topic, my earlier point was maybe not explained well.

Yes, exactly this is what I meant, sorry that I was not clear enough before.

When you later add the ability to search files on disk and all open documents, I think this workflow will become even stronger. I will happily wait for the full version, because this already looks very promising.

And thanks again for your really great work on this plugin. It already feels like something with a lot of potential.

guy038

Hello, @coises,

You said :

When the search dialog is narrow (typical if the docking dialog is used and docked to the left or right), the status message can overflow the available space. I added ellipsis to the message and a balloon tip on hover to show the whole message when it overflows.

Could you share a screenshot that illustrates this behavior as I have not been able, so far, to see any ellipsis char and any ballon tip !

Now, is this a bug or I did not understand the logic ?

Let’s suppose this text in a new tab :

This is a test
This is a test
This is a test

This is a test
This is a test
This is a test

Move to this new tab
Put the caret on the 4th empty line, without selecting anything else ( IMPORTANT )
Run Plugins> Search++ > Search...
Select the Plain button
SEARCH is
Check the Match case option ONLY
Click on the ▼ mark of the Find All button
Choose the Select > Select Before in Whole Document or the Select Before option

=> No message and no matches ??

I was rather expecting the message Selected 6 matches before current position

Replace the caret on the 4th empty line , without selecting anything else ( IMPORTANT )
Click on the ▼ sign of the Find All button
Choose the Select > Select After in Whole Document or the Select After option

=> Any is string is matched in entire document

=> Message : Selected 12 matches after selection ??

I was rather expecting the message Selected 6 matches after current position

Finally :

Replace the caret on the 4th empty line , without selecting anything else ( IMPORTANT )
Click on the ▼ sign of the Find All button
Choose the Select > Select in Whole Document option

=> Any is string is matched in entire document

=> Message : Selected 12 matches

This time, the results are coherent !

Now, @coises, to my mind, it would be interesting to change the layout, below :

Find ▼    Count ▼    Find All ▼

□ Match Case    □ Whole word only

By this one :

Find ▼    Count ▼    Find All ▼

Select ▼    Mark ▼    Show ▼

□ Match Case    □ Whole word only

In addition, this would give some more default values available for the Select, Mark and Show options ! What are your thoughts on this ?

A nice thing regarding the Search Mark feature is that you can use the native N++ Mark feature to perform additional actions :

You may clear all marked text with the Clear all marks button. Of course, you can simply use the Tools > Unmark All Text of Search++
You can use the Copy Marked Text of the Mark dialog. But, while trying to get a Search++ equivalent behavior, I suspected an other bug :((

Let’s use this text in a new tab

    This program is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify
    it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
    the Free Software Foundation, either version 3 of the License, or
    (at your option) any later version.

Move to this new tab
Run Plugins> Search++ > Search...
Select the Regex button
SEARCH ^.+
Click on the ▼ sign of the Find All button
Choose the Select > Select in Whole Document option

=> The 4 lines are selected

Then, in order to mimic the Copy Marked Text button, you just have to do a Ctrl + C action. So OK, so far !

Now, click anywhere to cancel the selection
Select this ABCDE string
Copy in the clipboard with a Ctrl + C action
Move to the new tab
Run Plugins> Search++ > Search...
Select the Regex button
SEARCH ^.+
Click on the ▼ sign of the Find All button
Choose the Mark > Mark in Whole Document option

=> The 4 lines are marked

-Then use the Tools > Marked text → Selections option

=> The 4 lines are ALSO selected

Run a Ctrl + C action to put this selection in the clipboard
Then, run a Ctrl + V action => The clipboard wrongly contains the string ABCDE

So, despite of the Tools > Marked text → Selections action, nothing can be copied !?

Regarding the marked strings, you probably know that you can go through all of them with the Ctrl + 0 and Ctrl + Shift + 0 shocrtcuts on main keyboard ( Refer to the Search > Jump Up > Find Mark Style and Search > Jump Down > Find Mark Style options )

And indeed, a Ctrl + 0 action moves to the next marked text, whatever that the mark operation was due to Notepad++ or Search++

Unfortunately, a Ctrl + Shift+ 0 action does not move to the previous marked text :-(( Could you confirm, @coises ?

However, note that commands Ctrl + 1 to Ctrl + 5 and Ctrl+ Shift + 1 to Ctrl + Shift + 5, to navigate between marked strings, work as expected if you change the Marked Style in Settings accordingly.

Last thing :

In the Tools menu, I noticed that the Unmark All Text button ONLY clears hhe marked text which is presently defined in the Settings dialog

So, you could, either :

Add a color to identify which marked text will be cleared
Simply clears any marked text whatever its style
Change the single option :

□ Unmark all text

in the two options :

□ Unmark present styled text

□ Unmark all styled text

Best Regards,

guy038

Coises

@guy038 said in Search++: A work in progress:

Could you share a screenshot that illustrates this behavior as I have not been able, so far, to see any ellipsis char and any ballon tip !

Now, is this a bug or I did not understand the logic ?
[…]
=> No message and no matches ??

That is a bug. It should work the same as Mark Before and Mark After. Thank you for catching and reporting it. I’ll fix it.

Now, @coises, to my mind, it would be interesting to change the layout, below :
[…]
In addition, this would give some more default values available for the Select, Mark and Show options ! What are your thoughts on this ?

I’m concerned about increasing the minimum size of the dialog and about making it too busy/cluttered. I won’t say I won’t consider it, but… I’m hesitant. It could be an option to add extra buttons, I suppose — the plugin already manages three layouts (horizontal, vertical and wide, the latter being for docking at the top or bottom), I suppose it could manage six (each existing layout in either 5-command-button or 8-command-button form). I’m not saying never… but not now.

-Then use the Tools > Marked text → Selections option

=> The 4 lines are ALSO selected

Run a Ctrl + C action to put this selection in the clipboard

Then, run a Ctrl + V action => The clipboard wrongly contains the string ABCDE

After clicking on a button in a dialog, keyboard focus is on the button. (That’s standard Windows behavior, which I have not attempted to change in this case.) Your Ctrl+C went to the button. You needed to return focus to the document (e.g., Ctrl+N) before you could copy the selection.

I admit this focus thing is an annoyance, but I think it would get even more confusing if I overrode Windows standard behavior in a dozen special cases by putting the focus where I think the user will want it next. (I did it with Select commands, but I’m not even sure that’s a good idea. How many exceptions to normal Windows behavior should I expect users to remember? At what point does keeping track of all the exceptions become more difficult than just keeping track of the focus?)

Unfortunately, a Ctrl + Shift+ 0 action does not move to the previous marked text :-(( Could you confirm, @coises ?

I can confirm, and I also see that the same thing happens with text marked using the Mark tab of the built-in search dialog. Search | Jump Up | Find Mark Style does work, but the Ctrl+Shift+0 shortcut does not.

If I change the shortcut to Ctrl+Shift+M, it works. Further testing suggests that Ctrl+Shift+0 does not work as a shortcut when assigned to any command. I haven’t yet checked to see if this is a known issue, or whether it persists without any plugins.

In the Tools menu, I noticed that the Unmark All Text button ONLY clears hhe marked text which is presently defined in the Settings dialog

So, you could, either :

Add a color to identify which marked text will be cleared

Simply clears any marked text whatever its style

Change the single option :

I see your point. The wording suggests that it will remove all marks of any kind, not just the mark style Search++ is using.

Notepad++ treats Find Mark Style differently than the other styles; Search | Clear Styles | Clear all Styles clears styles 1-5, but not the Find Mark Style. (The only way I know to clear that in native Notepad++ is in the Mark dialog.) So there isn’t true Clear All Styles already. (Beyond that, I might add a custom style, like Columns++ uses; I haven’t decided yet if that would be advantageous — having something that doesn’t overlap with anything Notepad++ uses — or just an unnecessary complication.)

I’m pretty sure I will want to stay with the notion that the normal way to use Search++ will be to pick a mark style and stick with it, so any time Search++ refers to a “mark” it means “a mark in the style selected in the settings dialog.” So I don’t really want to introduce any options that break that model by affecting styles other than the one selected.

Alan Kilborn

In regards to:

Further testing suggests that Ctrl+Shift+0 does not work as a shortcut when assigned to any command. I haven’t yet checked to see if this is a known issue

Maybe see this:
https://community.notepad-plus-plus.org/post/90173
or some of the other postings about Ctrl+Shift+0 in that topic.

Coises

@Alan-Kilborn said in Search++: A work in progress:

In regards to:

Further testing suggests that Ctrl+Shift+0 does not work as a shortcut when assigned to any command. I haven’t yet checked to see if this is a known issue

Maybe see this:
https://community.notepad-plus-plus.org/post/90173
or some of the other postings about Ctrl+Shift+0 in that topic.

Thank you, Alan. Good that someone still has memory cells working. (@guy038 and I were both in that discussion, and it seems neither of us remembered.)

Similar to what it sounds like happened to Guy in that thread, I attempted to reset all shortcuts for keyboard languages to None even though they already were all None, except for the last one, which had Ctrl+Space associated with something to do with IME and Chinese (probably came about when I was testing Columns++ search in double byte character sets). I changed it to None (repeatedly), but it changed itself back as soon as I OK’d the change.

None-the-less, even though no visible setting has changed, now Ctrl+Shift+0 works. No rhyme or reason to this corner of Windows, it seems. :-(

guy038

Hi, @alan-kilborn, @coises and All,

Many thanks @alan-kilborn, for solving the Ctrl + Shift + 0 not working at all ;-)) I completely forgot this old post. Like @coises, I confirm that your memory cells are working perfectly !

So, certainly, on my Windows 10 laptop, with your precious advice, I was able to solve this bug, in October 2023. But, it happens that I migrated my laptop to Windows 11, at the end of October 2025. And I supposed that this migration reset a lot of parameters, whose this one !

Thank you again for helping us find the right post !

Best Regards,

guy038

Coises

@guy038 said in Search++: A work in progress:

-Then use the Tools > Marked text → Selections option

=> The 4 lines are ALSO selected
Run a Ctrl + C action to put this selection in the clipboard

Then, run a Ctrl + V action => The clipboard wrongly contains the string ABCDE
So, despite of the Tools > Marked text → Selections action, nothing can be copied !?

I wrote:

After clicking on a button in a dialog, keyboard focus is on the button. (That’s standard Windows behavior, which I have not attempted to change in this case.) Your Ctrl+C went to the button. You needed to return focus to the document (e.g., Ctrl+N) before you could copy the selection.

That is true, but there is also a flaw in Marked text → Selections that causes an extra, empty selection to be included at the beginning, which could cause unexpected results when pasting.

A new version will be coming, but probably not until sometime tomorrow. Thank you for all your feedback.

Coises

@guy038 said in Search++: A work in progress:

Choose the Select > Select Before in Whole Document or the Select Before option

=> No message and no matches ??

[…]

-Then use the Tools > Marked text → Selections option

=> The 4 lines are ALSO selected

Run a Ctrl + C action to put this selection in the clipboard

Version 0.5.1 fixes the Before/After bug and adds some new commands to the Tools button menu; Copy Marked Text should avoid the need to make a selection from marked text just to copy it.

There are a few other small changes that hopefully are improvements.

guy038

Hello @alan-kilborn, @Coises and All,

Yesterday, I was pretty sure the bug had been fixed. Unfortunately, today, perhaps because I needed to re-start my laptop for other reasons, the bug is still here !

Of course, I re-ran the @alan-kilborn’s solution but without success
I tried to delete then re-assign the Ctrl + Shift + 0 shortcut to the Previous style of Find Mark style command within N++ => Not better
I turned my laptop off and then back on but no chance, either
I also visit the two sites, below, to get some tools to deternine which process could own the Ctrl + Shift + 0 shortcut => No result

https://www.nirsoft.net/utils/hot_keys_list.html

https://github.com/ITachiLab/hotkey-detective

Note that once Hotkeydetective.exe has been launched with administator rights, it is said to press the stolen key in order that the software shows you a path to the guilty process. However, hitting the Ctrl + Shift + 0 shortcut does not show any line, personally !

Finally, I had the idea of simply changing the Ctrl * Shift + 0 shortcut to Ctrl * Shift + 6. And… bingo, this change worked nicely !

Thus, doing the same thing for the Ctrl + 0 shortcut seems a possible solution to this problem !

BR

guy038

P.S. :

After using this work-around, I tried to assign the Ctrl + Shift + 0 shortcut to a command without shortcut, like the View > Summary... command. But it does not show the Summarize dialog :-((

In contrast, the shortcut Ctrl + 0, which is no longer used, displays the control character 0, as I did not check the Settings > Preferences... > Editing2 > Prevent control character (C0 code) typing into document option. Thus no need of the Control Panel feature in order to type the NUL character anymore !

guy038

Hello, @coises,

First, thanks for the Select Before/After fix ! Now, the new Copy Marked Text options, with the separator choice, are really practical and straightforward

Regarding the Tools > Select Marked Text option ( formely Marked text → Selections ), we need to do a Ctrl + N action, to replace focus on current document first, before doing a Ctrl + C action

Regarding the Enhance clearing behavior, I suppose that you mean :

If current document already contains some selections, based on a previous search

OR

If current document already contains some marked text, based on a previous search

OR

If current document already contains some invisible lines and some visible lines, based on a previous search

=> The appearance of current document does not changed if present search does not find any match ( => previous selections are kept, previous marks are kept and no other lines are hidden )

Of course, this makes sense !

This still one point that’s a bit unclear to me : what is the fundamental difference between all these options, when compared in pairs :

Find                         vs        Find in Whole Document
Find Backward                vs        Find Backward in Whole Document


Count                        vs        Count in Whole Document
Count Before                 vs        Count Before in Whole Document
Count After                  vs        Count After in Whole Document


Find All Before              vs        Find All Before in Whole Document
Find All After               vs        Find All After in Whole Document

Select Before                vs        Select Before in Whole Document
Select After                 vs        Select After in Whole Document

Mark Before                  vs        Mark Before in Whole Document
Mark After                   vs        Mark After in Whole Document

Show Before                  vs        Show Before in Whole Document
Show After                   vs        Show After in Whole Document


Replace and Find             vs        Replace And Find in Whole Document
Replace and Find Backward    vs        Replace and Find Backward in Whole Document

Find or Replace              vs        Find or Replace in Whole Document
Find Backward or Replace     vs        Find Backward or Replace in Whole Document


Replace All                  vs        Replace All in Whole Document
Replace All Before           vs        Replace All Before in Whole Document
Replace All Aftrt            vs        Replace All After in Whole Document

Best Regards,

guy038

Coises

@guy038 said in Search++: A work in progress:

This still one point that’s a bit unclear to me : what is the fundamental difference between all these options, when compared in pairs :

The principle (see the last bullet point under help for search scopes) is that commands which don’t specify a scope search in marked text if there is any; otherwise, in the current selection if it is not empty; otherwise, in the whole document. That’s subject to the Settings: if you unchecked both Automatically search within selections and Automatically search within marked text, then all the pairs of commands you listed would be identical; and there are the limits on when selections are considered “large enough” to trigger search within selection. (A selection that is the immediate result of a stepwise search never causes the same search to search within that selection no matter how large it is.)

There are two special cases, and a third questionable feature, also involved:

There are no Before or After commands with in Selection scope. (My logic is that something can’t be both in the selection and before or after it.) So search commands that include Before or After can only be in Marked Text or in Whole Document.
Mark commands that don’t specify a scope don’t automatically scope to in Marked Text even if Automatically search within marked text is enabled. What happens is that unless you’ve checked Always unmark all text before Mark command, default Mark commands add to existing marks. I know this is a different behavior from selections, but I think because selections are so volatile, and marks are not, it is natural to use them in different ways. Should this exception be an option in Settings? I’m inclined to add it as a default-checked sub-option of Automatically search within marked text.
Search commands that specify in Selection or in Marked Text search the whole document if there is no (non-empty) selection or marked text. I’m questioning the sense of that now. I’m thinking that if the user specifies “in selection” or ”in marked text,” and there is none, the search should fail with a message like “No marked text to search” rather than silently discarding the specified scope.

Thoughts about that logic, especially point 3 (which I am inclined to change in the next release) are welcome and encouraged.

I have tried to keep as much “symmetry” as I could, to make it all more comprehensible. I think it is possible that I have created some nonsense in practice.

Points 1 and 3 together mean that Before and After commands without a scope are either the same as Before/After in Marked Text if Automatically search within marked text is checked, or the same as Before/After in Whole Document if it isn’t. However, as I wrote, I’m questioning point 3; without that, when the relevant setting is checked, there would be a difference (the commands that don’t specify a scope would switch between in Marked Text and in Whole Document depending on whether there was any marked text in the document, whereas neither command that specified one scope would switch to the other).

So… looking at the full list you gave, group by group, assuming default settings… this is what is supposed to happen (full testing of every possible case has not been done):

Find                         vs        Find in Whole Document
Find Backward                vs        Find Backward in Whole Document

The two on the left will find the next match in marked text following or preceding the current position or selection if any text is marked; otherwise they will find the first or last match in the selected text if “enough” text is selected; otherwise they will find the next match following or preceding the current position or selection in the whole document. Those on the right will always find the next match following or preceding the current position or selection in the whole document regardless of whether any text is marked or selected.

Count                        vs        Count in Whole Document

Count will count only matches in marked text if any text is marked; otherwise it will count only matches in selected text if “enough” text is selected; otherwise it will count all matches in the whole document. Count in Whole Document will always count all matches in the whole document regardless of whether any text is marked or selected.

Count Before                 vs        Count Before in Whole Document
Count After                  vs        Count After in Whole Document

The two on the left will count only matches in marked text that are before or after the current position or selection if any text is marked; otherwise they will count matches before or after the current position or selection in the whole document. Those on the right will always count matches before or after the current position or selection in the whole document regardless of whether any text is marked.

Find All Before              vs        Find All Before in Whole Document
Find All After               vs        Find All After in Whole Document

The two on the left will list only matches in marked text that are before or after the current position or selection if any text is marked; otherwise they will list all matches before or after the current position or selection in the whole document. Those on the right will always list all matches before or after the current position or selection in the whole document regardless of whether any text is marked.

Select Before                vs        Select Before in Whole Document
Select After                 vs        Select After in Whole Document

The two on the left will select only matches in marked text that are before or after the current position or selection if any text is marked; otherwise they will select all matches before or after the current position or selection in the whole document. Those on the right will always select all matches before or after the current position or selection in the whole document regardless of whether any text is marked.

Mark Before                  vs        Mark Before in Whole Document
Mark After                   vs        Mark After in Whole Document

I’ll double-check my logic later, but I think these are identical, since (1 above) Before/After can’t be in selection, and (2 above) Mark doesn’t automatically scope to marked text. It’s unclear to me which ones to remove, since either choice breaks the symmetry and could be confusing to users, but having two commands that do the same thing is also confusing.

Show Before                  vs        Show Before in Whole Document
Show After                   vs        Show After in Whole Document

I grant that this would be a strange use of Show. In the circumstance where there are hidden lines both before and after the current position or selection, and there is some marked text in document, the ones on the left would search only marked text before or after the current position or selection for lines to unhide, while the ones on the right would search all text.

Replace and Find             vs        Replace And Find in Whole Document
Replace and Find Backward    vs        Replace and Find Backward in Whole Document

Find or Replace              vs        Find or Replace in Whole Document
Find Backward or Replace     vs        Find Backward or Replace in Whole Document

Replace All                  vs        Replace All in Whole Document
Replace All Before           vs        Replace All Before in Whole Document
Replace All After            vs        Replace All After in Whole Document

These are like their Find and Find All counterparts. The ones on the left work like “in Marked Text” if any text is marked; otherwise, like “in Selection” if “enough” text is selected; otherwise like “in Whole Document” (like the ones on the right).