Improve search dialog

[risky777]

Check for existing issues

• Completed

Describe the bug / provide steps to reproduce it

I use acode with hardware keyboard. ctrl+f controls search dialog, but this dialog has behaviour that I don't understand.

When I press ctrl+f, I would expect that cursor:

• jumps from text into search dialog
• jumps from search dialog back into text
  or something simple like this.

Now, cursor can jump into search dialog, but it can also do nothing or make dialog dissapear or some other behaviour.

Is there explanation how is intended for ctrl+f to behave?

Environment

android 15 11.
acode 1.11.3

If applicable, add mockups / screenshots regarding your vision

No response

If applicable, attach your Acode.log file to this issue.

Acode.log

[risky777]

in acode v1.11.6, ctrl+f works like this:

• i'm editing text in text editor
• i want to find some text and press ctrl+f and find-dialog works ok:
  • find-dialog opens and is active (text is entered in find-dialog and not in editor)
• when i find text then i enter in editor and edit text
  • find-dialog is still open but inactive which is ok
• when i want to find some other text then i press ctrl+f but it doesn't work correctly:
  • first-press ctrl+f clears find-dialog but find dialog is not active (text is still entered in editor and not in find-dialog)
  • second-press ctrl+f closes find-dialog
  • third-press ctrl+f finally works properly

ctrl+f should always have same behaviour:
- if find-dialog is not open then it should be opened
- find-dialog should become active (text is entered in find-dialog and not in editor)
? if there is already text in find-dialog then i'm not sure if text should be selected or text should be cleared

[risky777]

Are you doing this on purpose, not resolving issues and then close them unresolved? Isn't it easier to write that this is not something you want to resolve-implement?

[RohitKushvaha01]

Are you doing this on purpose, not resolving issues and then close them unresolved? Isn't it easier to write that this is not something you want to resolve-implement?

This is not a critical bug and therefore has a low priority. There are currently 60+ open issues, many of which have a higher priority than this one. As a result, this issue was automatically closed due to inactivity by the bot.
If we had no intention of addressing it, it would have been closed much earlier.
Please be patient. If this feature is important to you, you’re welcome to submit a pull request.
Thank you for your understanding.