feat: navigation between stacks via n/b #652
Merged
+156
−0
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Include workspace comments in the sequence as they are also top-level navigation items.
microbit-matt-hillsdon
requested review from
maribethb
and removed request for
a team
|
Thanks for your pull request! It looks like this may be your first contribution to a Google open source project. Before we can look at your pull request, you'll need to sign a Contributor License Agreement (CLA). View this failed invocation of the CLA check for more information. For the most up to date status, view the checks section at the bottom of the pull request. |
gonfunko
approved these changes
Jul 8, 2025
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Include workspace comments in the sequence as they are also top-level navigation items.
We can't think of a better approach than continuing to talk about this in terms of the common scenario of stacks though, as "next top-level bounds item" is way too abstract.
Keys are b/n as they’re adjacent on QWERTY and AZERTY (unlike < and > which are really, “.” and “,” and Q/E also lose their logic on AZERTY). I think it's the least worst option that's been suggested to me. You could say back/next in docs though I've used previous in the code to match the internal terms.
Thanks to @glastonbridge for the initial implementation.
Fixes #401