add option to sort cpu history

[acxz]

Description

A description of the change and what it does. If relevant (such as any change that modifies the UI), please provide screenshots of the change:

This patchset adds the option to sort cpus by value.

With cpu_sort: false:

With cpu_sort: true:

Issue

If applicable, what issue does this address?

Closes: #702

Testing

If relevant, please state how this was tested. All changes must be tested to work:

Tested with cpu_sort: false to retain default behavior, tested with cpu_sort: true to show ordered CPU values in cpu_legend and ordered/non-intersecting lines in cpu_graph.

Please also indicate which platforms were tested. All platforms directly affected by the change must be tested:

• Windows
• macOS
• Linux

Checklist

If relevant, ensure the following have been met:

• Areas your change affects have been linted using rustfmt (cargo fmt)
• The change has been tested and doesn't appear to cause any unintended breakage
• Documentation has been added/updated if needed (README.md, help menu, etc.)
• The pull request passes the provided CI pipeline
• There are no merge conflicts

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Merging #703 (dc6d508) into master (6fa04de) will decrease coverage by 0.04%.
The diff coverage is 4.16%.

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##           master    #703      +/-   ##
=========================================
- Coverage    7.84%   7.80%   -0.05%     
=========================================
  Files          53      53              
  Lines        8269    8316      +47     
=========================================
  Hits          649     649              
- Misses       7620    7667      +47     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
src/app.rs	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
src/app/data_farmer.rs	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
src/bin/main.rs	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
src/canvas/dialogs/dd_dialog.rs	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
src/canvas/widgets/battery_display.rs	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
src/canvas/widgets/cpu_basic.rs	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
src/canvas/widgets/cpu_graph.rs	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
src/canvas/widgets/disk_table.rs	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
src/canvas/widgets/mem_graph.rs	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
src/canvas/widgets/network_graph.rs	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
... and 9 more

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 194a769...dc6d508. Read the comment docs.

[ClementTsang]

I'll try to take a look at this in a bit. Don't worry about the failed codecov check, it's fine for now.

[ClementTsang]

Took a bit of a look and tried it on my machine. One thing I'm a bit concerned about is that it might be a bit confusing that, say, "CPU0" now means something entirely different. With the sort off, it means the 1st core/thread. But with it on, now it just means "the highest usage". This is kinda misleading to me.

It might be a bit tricky since my UI code right now is admittedly pretty awful (hopefully I will have time to finally work on it after I graduate soon), but it might be better to rename the entries and/or column if this option is enabled to be better indicative that the first entry represents the highest usages over all threads, second entry represents second-highest usage over all threads, etc. As for what to call this column, I don't know off the top of my head.

I would also consider renaming the option as well - cpu_sort, at least personally, made me think at first that it would just sort the CPU core entries by current usage, not just the values. As in, if CPU0 was at 10% while CPU10 was at 50%, the entire CPU10 entry, along with its usage, would be put above CPU0 *. So I'm worried the option name might be misleading. Again, I don't really have any actual suggestions at the moment, unfortunately.

As for the code/logic itself, it looks fine to me right now, so good work there. I feel like the main things is just hammering out any UI/UX details. If I have any ideas, I'll put them below (maybe in a week or so after I finish some IRL stuff), but feel free to leave any thoughts.

* This is behaviour I might plan on adding in the future, for what its worth.

[acxz]

Thanks for the review @ClementTsang. I agree with you on your points and had the same concerns/doubts while implementing this feature (i.e. how to best present it)

but it might be better to rename the entries and/or column if this option is enabled to be better indicative that the first entry represents the highest usages over all threads, second entry represents second-highest usage over all threads, etc. As for what to call this column, I don't know off the top of my head.

I like the renaming idea, but again not sure what to rename it yet. If we can change the legend header than it can give us a better UI/UX option. maybe something like Rank instead of just CPU and RankX instead of CPUX?

would also consider renaming the option as well - cpu_sort

maybe sort_cpu_hist(or usage) is a better flag here if we want sort_cpu to be for the current utilization value.

As in, if CPU0 was at 10% while CPU10 was at 50%, the entire CPU10 entry, along with its usage, would be put above CPU0 *.

I actually already implemented this first (as a stepping stone for this feature), and you can see it in the commit history: 228292d

Note: while the legend is fine, this makes the graphs nigh impossible to interpret as entire lines switch colors constantly at every timestep.

if you want I can separate that commit out and submit it as a PR enabled with the sort_cpu flag while we finalize a name and better UI/UX for this feature.

As for the code/logic itself, it looks fine to me right now, so good work there.

Thanks!

Edit: I have renamed the option to sort_cpu_hist and changed the legend entries to use Rank instead of CPU. Let me know if you have a better suggestion.

[magnetophon]

I came here to file an issue about this and saw there's already a PR.
I'd love to see this merged!