diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'docs/superpowers/plans/2026-08-03-post-0.1.0-usability-closed.md')
| -rw-r--r-- | docs/superpowers/plans/2026-08-03-post-0.1.0-usability-closed.md | 39 |
1 files changed, 39 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/docs/superpowers/plans/2026-08-03-post-0.1.0-usability-closed.md b/docs/superpowers/plans/2026-08-03-post-0.1.0-usability-closed.md index 8ae8dff..cfa119b 100644 --- a/docs/superpowers/plans/2026-08-03-post-0.1.0-usability-closed.md +++ b/docs/superpowers/plans/2026-08-03-post-0.1.0-usability-closed.md @@ -4802,3 +4802,42 @@ failed, which is what a missing `accept()` does to `exec()`. **Item 78 stays open**, carrying the rule shortcut alone. The road from a search to a rule already exists: save the query, then create a rule from it. + +## 86. A right-click search can replace or narrow, but never exclude + +**Done 2026-08-14, unreleased.** See +`specs/2026-08-14-exclude-from-search-design.md`. + +**Observed (user, 2026-08-14):** "we've added the possibility to search clicking +on any element in the message pane, the current available search options are to +run the query from scratch or add to the existing query. A missing option is to +add negatively (not)." + +**Cause (verified in the code before any was written).** Item 85 shipped exactly +two operations and wired them through as a single boolean, so the gap was not a +missing menu entry over an existing capability: there was no third state for an +entry to select, and the signature could not express one. `SearchTerm` had +`extend()` and no exclusion form at all. + +**Shipped as five commits.** `SearchTerm::exclude()`, then the `SearchMode` enum +alone, then the four signatures widened as one mechanical change, then the +`hasQuery` guard, then the menu entries. Each step left the suite green, which +is what made the enum change safe to do in one commit across three files. + +**Two decisions the user made, recorded because they are not recoverable from +the code.** Excluding from an EMPTY query would mean the whole Maildir minus one +value, so the entry is greyed rather than hidden, and `exclude()` returns empty +as a second layer against a caller that forgets the guard. And the two shipped +labels were left untouched, so nothing the user already knew moved. + +**The plan under-counted the signature change.** It predicted one test file and +the compiler found three: `test_messageview.cpp` and `test_mainwindow.cpp` also +emit `searchRequested` directly. Four extra call sites, no design consequence, +but a reminder that "four signatures" is not the same as "four call sites" and +grepping for the latter is cheap. + +**Verified:** 23 of 23 tests passing. The guard's mutation check fails on the +blocked emit when the condition is disabled, and it did not hang, which is the +outcome item 85's trap made worth checking for. The user hand tested all three +surfaces with an empty query bar and with one, including the disjunction case +the parenthesising exists for. |
