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

Updating statistics at bottom #400

Open
3milio opened this issue Jun 13, 2019 · 1 comment
Open

Updating statistics at bottom #400

3milio opened this issue Jun 13, 2019 · 1 comment

Comments

@3milio
Copy link

3milio commented Jun 13, 2019

It appears that the statistics at the bottom (ie, overall document statistics) don't get updated when you remove task items, until you take focus off the document then return to it.

For example, if I have 3 out of 10 tasks marked as done the bottom statistics will say, "3/10 done (30%)". But if I remove two of them, it doesn't update the statistics until I switch to another document or application the come back to it. At that point it'll say, "3/8 done (37%)".

Given that those statistics get updated immediately when adding new tasks, I'd think they're intended to work the same way when removing tasks.

@vovkkk
Copy link
Collaborator

vovkkk commented Jun 13, 2019

I'd think they're intended to work the same way when removing tasks.

No, it is not intended. A task is being added with command (you don‘t just type something, but trigger a command) thus the plugin knows that amount of tasks was changed hence we have to update statistics.
But when you remove a task it is the same as you would type/remove something randomly, i.e. we cannot know if amount of tasks was changed without actually count them hence we would have to count them each time something is changed like you type one letter—we check amount of tasks, you remove the letter—we check amount of task, and so on. So it might be too heavy.
This is about the current way it works: random editing is ignored.

It does not mean we cannot change it. TBH I don’t even remember if tried to resolve it previously, I guess when it was added it looked good enough.

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