3 ms·
Ok, so the difference is: 1. It disappears after a few seconds. 2. It has no "next/previous/highlight all" etc. buttons (it still have these features, just no
by thrdbndndn 5y ago
Ok, so the difference is:
1. It disappears after a few seconds.
2. It has no "next/previous/highlight all" etc. buttons (it still have these features, just no clickable buttons)
It still makes no sense to me.
I guess maybe a small portion of people would find the auto-disappearing thing useful, even though in normal Ctrl+F all you need to do is pressing Esc.
But the second "feature" totally baffles me. It's not like Ctrl+F is some expensive GUI to launch, why would I want to not have these buttons? Even if you don't need them at all (I don't), you can simply not click them, there is no downside by having them.
- lol768 5y agoDoes the usual Ctrl+F GUI support filtering down to links only?
- mejutoco 5y agoYou can use the single quote character to search only links
- thrdbndndn 5y agoIt doesn't, but "/" does not do that either. It's "'" that works that way (and obviously useful). I just don't know about "/".
- aabbcc1241 5y agoAnd this has collision with my vim extension