How to permanently disable one of the panels? One is enough!

[eugenesv]

I like a lot the ability to customize the view and behavior of TC via default settings and a bunch of addons (color files by extension, create sort groups and display e.g. executables at the top of file list, hidden files at the bottom, automatically calculate and display folder size etc. etc.)
However, the one default feature I don't like at all, but what is considered a "signature feature" — the second pane. I find much more useful to use just different tabs to do my copy&paste operations between different folders and would rather see that precious screen real estate used for e.g. previews instead of another file pane.
Now, I know that I can minimize the second file pane to 0% and not see it, but it's still there and sometimes I'd switch to it by mistake by hitting tab or something. This is a minor annoyance.

Is there a chance to add an option that would completely disable the second pane and leave me with all the extra configurable awesomeness of of TC + addons?
Thank you!

[MVV]

Second panel is really a significant feature, it allows to speed many operations up significantly if you're using keyboard (it seems that it is not your case if you copy to tabs). You can only set second panel with to 0% but not to disable it. BTW Tab key doesn't switch to panel with 0% width.

[milo1012]

TC is a Orthodox file manager,
so it uses two panes/panels, simply because that's the concept.

I'm not aware of any setting or add-on/plug-in that would disable the 2nd pane.
Setting the width to 0% is completely enough for me.

[eugenesv]

so it uses two panes/panels

And yet it has an option to have 0% to hide the second panel. So, obviously, hiding the second panel does not contradict the OFM concept.
All I'm asking for is for a better implementation of this feature — when second panel is invisible it should be disabled so you couldn't interact with it (e.g. switch to it and wonder where your cursor disappeared) unless you make it visible again.

the width to 0% is completely enough for me.

And it's not enough for me, hence this post. Just out of curiosity — what % of your time in TC do you spend with 0% width (to be able to say whether it's enough or not or you just never use it for it to matter to you)?

[Stefan2]

 
2eugenesv

Maybe 'Tree View Ctrl+F8' may serve you?

Then you get a WinExplorer type of view.





 

[eugenesv]

Second panel is really a significant feature, it allows to speed many operations up significantly

And I don't mind if you continue to use it for those perceived performance benefits. It just doesn't offer any to me since it's much easier for me to switch to a different tab (especially since most of those operations I perform with Winkey+# shortcuts that open the folders I need in an adjacent tab), rather then switch to the second panel and then do the same operation. Also, switching between panels with Tab is practically just as fast as switching to the adjacent tab with Ctrl-Tab / Ctrl-Shift-Tab

if you're using keyboard (it seems that it is not your case if you copy to tabs)

You can also switch tabs with a keyboard.

BTW Tab key doesn't switch to panel with 0% width.

That's not true. Compare these two screenshots http://imgur.com/a/o0GiW —

• 1 The first shows panel 1 @ 100% and
  2 The second (after I've pressed Tab) shows that nothing is highlighted because the cursor is at the second panel, which is invisible at 0%

I'd be happy if TC behaved they way you describe, that's exactly what I'd like to request!
I'm using version 8.52a, maybe you have something newer that behaves differently? Or using some addon that adjusts the panel behavior? Or maybe there is an option "don't interact with 2nd panel if it's at 0%" that I've missed?

[eugenesv]

 
2eugenesv
Maybe 'Tree View Ctrl+F8' may serve you?
Then you get a WinExplorer type of view.
 

Thanks for the suggestion, Stefan2, but trees are just awful — so much space wasted showing the full tree path when I can much easier see the same information in the breadcrumb navigation bar. Also it distracts from focusing on the current folder content since you see so much extra info.

[milo1012]

So, obviously, hiding the second panel does not contradict the OFM concept.

But the panel is still there and will be used, even though you don't see it,
for all basic operations in TC as the "Target <-> Source" concept, e.g. Copy/Move (F5/F6) or Packing.
You can also see them in the ButtonBar parameters %P%N VS %T%M
or the command line parameters /L= VS /R=
and so on.
An orthodox file manager just works this way, and that's why it's basically not possible to disable it completely.

Just out of curiosity — what % of your time in TC do you spend with 0% width

Currently only when I use a custom columns view with extremely wide columns or detailed content, but probably never for the basic TC operation.
Therefore setting the width manually maybe once a week doesn't bother me.

[Stefan2]

BTW Tab key doesn't switch to panel with 0% width.

That's not true.

But seams to work for me too, as MVV tells.... TC 8.51a

No tabbing to hidden panel.
But F5/F6 and drive buttons still works with the hidden panel.


So I guess that would be a lot of work for Christian
to disable every panel-wise feature if one pane is hidden.
I would not wait for such feature being implemented,
rather would search for an work around.

Maybe switch hidden pane to 'VirtualPanel' WFX plugin or such.
But I have no real suggestion right now.




 

[Dalai]

BTW Tab key doesn't switch to panel with 0% width.

That's not true.

Don't know what you're doing but it works fine for me. Setting one panel to 100% using the mouse (and, optionally, holding the Shift key) and after that there's no switch to the other panel (with 0%) possible.

[EDIT]
There's a bug in TC 8.52a x64: It switches to the 0% panel while the 32 bit version does not.
[/EDIT]

[EDIT2]
Reported the bug here.
[/EDIT2]

Regards
Dalai

[eugenesv]

An orthodox file manager just works this way, and that's why it's basically not possible to disable it completely.

Sorry, this explains exactly nothing. There is no inherent reason why all those functions can not be disabled when second panel is hidden.
I'm not sure if you're familiar with Far Manager http://www.farmanager.com/, which I used back in the days — it's also as classic OFM as they come, dating back to 1996, and yet nothing prevents it from changing how F5/F6 function when second panel is disabled (e.g. when you set it to "Quick View" or "Description") — they simply offer you different default paths (your current folder) vs. when second panel is a file panel (folder of the second panel). The same thing is true for all other functions that depend on the panel — when no second file panel is visible, the functions are modified. No contradiction with OFM principles whatever those might be.

Update: case in point — now that Dalai explained that this behavior is purely a 64bit bug, I hope you can see that there is nothing in OFM that would force the behavior you defend.

Therefore setting the width manually maybe once a week doesn't bother me.

QED. Therefore your experience makes your assessment on whether it's ok or not irrelevant — you simply don't use the feature to notice the inconvenience.

[eugenesv]

There's a bug in TC 8.52a x64: It switches to the 0% panel while the 32 bit version does not.

Ah, thank you very much! Then consider this thread a bump to that bug report

[milo1012]

Sorry, this explains exactly nothing. There is no inherent reason why all those functions can not be disabled when second panel is hidden.

Oh, it does.
I'm aware of other file managers, I used a lot of them since at least 20 years, you know.
My point was that TC is DESIGNED to work like that, but you suggest that it is supposed to work with a disabled 2nd panel like before.
Well, you're free to suggest it, but in the same suggestion you should explain what TC should do in case of all functions that involve the Target/Source concept.
File operations, i.e. Copy/Move is an integral part of a file manager.
So what should TC do if you disable the 2nd panel and you press F5/F6, use a button bar command with the mentioned parameters, etc. ?
Show a message box with "Sorry, function is disabled"?
Always use "in-place" copy/move?
Try to "guess" to which tab you want to copy?
If you can come up with reasonable suggestions for all the places where the target/source concept normally applies, I wouldn't see any problem with your request.

No contradiction with OFM principles whatever those might be.

I already explained that OFM is basically the target/source concept.
And even if you find people that would disagree, TC currently uses the concept all over the place.
So like I said above: if you can come up with alternate solutions for all operations where the concept is mandatory, go for it,
and let Christian decide whether he want's to implement it.



Update:

now that Dalai explained that this behavior is purely a 64bit bug, I hope you can see that there is nothing in OFM that would force the behavior you defend.

It's a bug that you can use tab in x64.
But you will still have the target panel's path suggested for all target/source operations.
So no, there is still that very behavior, even if you can't switch to the 2nd panel that way.

[eugenesv]

But seams to work for me too, as MVV tells.... TC 8.51a No tabbing to hidden panel. 

Yes, thanks for confirming this. As Dalai mentioned this is a 64bit bug

But F5/F6 and drive buttons still works with the hidden panel.
So I guess that would be a lot of work for Christian to disable every panel-wise feature if one pane is hidden.

If that's too much work (not sure why, but maybe it is) I would be fine if this didn't happen. I can't hit F5/F6 "by accident" when 2nd panel is not visible, which is very much unlike Tab

Maybe switch hidden pane to 'VirtualPanel' WFX plugin or such.

Thanks for the idea, just tried it — it still switches to the 0% virtual panel tab

[Stefan2]

Maybe switch hidden pane to 'VirtualPanel' WFX plugin or such.

Thanks for the idea, just tried it — it still switches to the 0% virtual panel tab

Yes, you are right, but the idea was that VirtualPanel is maybe less harm than any real folder. Just an idea.