Jump to content

Sorting issue introduced in 1625


Recommended Posts


I don't know if it's a bug or a feature ;)

When downloading torrents with a lot of files I set some to high priority (to get them first complete, especially samples, previews, descriptions ...) and sort file list by percent complete. Every time a file completes within the torrent I set it back to normal and the next one to high priority. This was very easy till beta 15xx but got annoying in 1625 (note that I do not mean completing or sorting of the torrents list but the bottom window with the files within a single torrent):

- Clicking on percentage complete column header sorted descending before, complete files were an top. Now with 1625 percentage is sorted ascending, I have to click twice in the header every time I change sorting to get the old sorting behaviour

- When another file completes it moved on top of the list among all 100% complete files, so I could easily see that a new file is complete. Now when a new file completes in 1625 it is the last of the 100% complete files so I have to scroll down and search for the last 100% files to see if it's a high priority one so I have to switch to the next one. The second sort criteria (after my manually chosen percentage complete) switched from "high prio first" to "low prio first"

Is it possible to revert those two default sort directions? I think regarding "percentage" the complete files are most important and should be on top of the list again at the first click in the header, not the second. And for the second sort criteria high priorized files are more important and should be on top too. It was great before but now it's annoying to handle a bunch of torrents with many files within.

I assume that other sort directions were inverted too, but this two are the ones I use and need.

Sumi Vano

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regarding your first "bug," Windows behaves exactly the same as this, so I can't possibly see why it's considered a bug. Interface consistency is (IMHO) more important than making use of some behavior ludde didn't bother fixing (yes, column sorting was more-or-less dilapidated, and needed a good cleanup). Consistency is exactly what prompted this change in the first place, and having some columns sort ascending first while others were sort descending first is hardly consistent. Sort ascending first before descending is much more logical than the other way around, so all the columns were modified to do this.

As for your second issue, I can sorta understand, but in the end, you're gonna have to scroll *somewhere*, and unless you know exactly where you're scrolling to, it's equally a pain in the arse to scroll to the top of the 100% part of the list. In the end, getting to the last item in a list is (IMO) almost always easier than getting to the top of something in the middle of the list.

I'm moving this to the User Interface Design subforum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Create New...