Tab order broken in 3.5.2088.7 - fixed in 3.7.2209.3
-
When opening multiple tabs at once (by middle-clicking a folder in Speed Dial), tabs are now focused in reverse order compared to previous versions. This problem did not exist in previous snapshot.
Vivaldi 3.5.2088.7 on Windows 10 x64
-
@ender85 Does that happen to you when right-clicking a Bookmarks folder? That's the only kind I open multiples of, but no reversal there.
-
I never tried right-clicking a bookmarks folder before, so I don't know if the behaviour changed (right-clicking and selecting any of the Open options gives me same wrong order as on Speed Dial).
-
@ender85 You're right, sorry. I had my versions mixed up.
I don't know if it's intentional or not. If we were designing Vivaldi and had to choose, would it be more intuitive for the top bookmark in the folder to be on the right or left? It's now on the left when it used to be on the right.
-
To me it's both more intuitive that the first item appears as the first (leftmost) opened tab, and that it's the first focused item (I noticed another thing - if I middle-click a folder in Speed Dial, then close and re-open Vivaldi, the old [left to right] tab order is used as long as I don't open another tab, in which case the rest of the tab order gets reversed, so IMHO, this is a bug).
-
I think this is the same bug as has already been discussed in the snapshot thread.
-
@potmeklecbohdan Might be related, but probably isn't the same – I've got New Tab Position set to "As last tab".
-
-
This is still not fixed in 3.5.2110.3.
-
Definitely reported or not?
-
definitely reported here (next page Gwen-Dragon confirmed it)
-
@derDay While it may be related somehow, they seem to be different problems. This one is about ordering (ABC vs CBA). That one is about how "After Active Tab" doesn't work.
-
@guigirl That's not global, as I said in the same thread, so far it depended on the pre set New Tab Position. That is, if you are at tab O and have tabs ABCD in a BM folder, and you've set "After Related Tabs", every new tab is related to the previous (opened) one so you get O->A,B,C,D, while if you 've set "After Active Tab", there's only one active tab, the one you are at, O, so A is being opened first, next B is opened next to the active tab which is still the initial one (O), so you get O->D,C,B,A. Only in 3.5 due to the cleaning of code (and the known reported bug by you) it got a bit messed up, thus the confusion.
-
@guigirl said in Bug: tab order broken in 3.5.2088.7:
@npro said in Bug: tab order broken in 3.5.2088.7:
have tabs ABDC in a BM folder
I expect you have a typo there.
thx, fixed
-
@guigirl said in Bug: tab order broken in 3.5.2088.7:
Fwiw, just now i tested those other two options. Guess what? 100% of the time, my result is ABC. Ain't i the lucky bunny then?
Lol, that's the bug we are talking about, try the same with Vivaldi Stable to see how it was pre 3.5
-
@guigirl So the other way it was an unnoticed bug since the beginning from what you say, and discovered in 3.5, nope, doesn't make sense either (see part about tab O being ALWAYS the active one, next to active = next to O).
-
@guigirl So "After Active Tab" has no reason to exist and should be deleted. Fine by me . /edit: but mind it isn't only about stored tabs.
-
@rseiler Uhm, I might be wrong here, but as far as I understand the opening post, this thread is about the order of the focusing of the tabs, i.e. opening the folder places the tabs in the tab bar in the order ABCD, but when you close one tab the next one is focused in the order DCBA. At least that's what I am experiencing as I tried to explain more thoroughly (and more complicated) here.
I haven't reported that yet because I couldn't find someone who could confirm it. -
Today's posts stretch to the breaking point my ability to understand what's happening, but to the point of "ABC stored = ABC opened" not being called a bug....
We can agree that it's an unannounced change of behavior in 3.5. If it's a deliberate improvement, they need to say so and we can move on. If it isn't, it's a bug.
Maybe they should have done it that way from Day 1. Maybe it makes more sense. But they didn't.
-
@guigirl It may be logical, but after several years if they change something completely unannounced and out of the blue, by definition it can't be expected.
Just because something might be a change for the better doesn't eliminate it possibly being a bug. After all, they've been stone silent on this sudden change. And where are all the complaints about how it's been all along if it was so illogical? I don't think it was top of mind for anyone over the last five years, leading me to wonder all the more if it was intentional or not. We can't even get some things changed with hundreds of requests.
It's not great to have unintentional changes. Next time, it might be something you don't like.