Skip to content

fix: read setting leaves and use the existing viewed-object bar - #1752

Merged
trissim merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
hotfix/view-settings-read-and-sidebar
Nov 13, 2026
Merged

trissim merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
hotfix/view-settings-read-and-sidebar

Conversation

@trissim

@trissim trissim commented Nov 13, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

SettingsReader now reads ObjectState.fields. FieldProxy follows the existing ParameterStructure, resolving one leaf rather than reconstructing every dataclass during paint. ObjectState #67 merged as d34d75803d3b7e65128bf43ab867bb70f37cd013 and this package declares that version.

Properties are a panel in the existing ThreadSidebar. Session, channel and file views inherit the same bar resource; the separate ObjectSidebar and mounting marker are deleted. The right-click editor and that panel still edit the same ObjectConfiguration. Lazy inheritance, explicit overrides, reset and persistence remain owned there.

The user's existing settings actually contain an object sidebar placement. Its value declaration is retained solely to decode that saved data; a nominal ActiveSidebarPlacement parent derives the two current roles, so the old role cannot claim screen space. No configuration file was written.

Executed small native controls: real Toad settings follow registered global edits, retain an explicit child override, and inherit again on reset; padding resolves as a leaf. All three view classes import and are concrete. A first inheritance attempt omitted the application's registry registration and failed setup; corrected application lifecycle passed. A later control reached every assertion for active roles, inherited bar methods and current saved-layout decoding, printed its result, then exceeded the 15-second outer limit during process exit (exit 124). This is not a passing process-exit check. No suite, profile or CPU-speed claim. Physical sidebar trial and live CPU effect follow installation.

Copilot AI balanced review requested due to automatic review settings November 13, 2026 01:18

Copilot AI left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Copilot was unable to review this pull request because the user who requested the review has insufficient remaining quota. Try requesting a review at a lower effort level.

An organization owner can choose the repository organization as the billing source for reviews requested by members with a paid Copilot license. Learn about Copilot code review billing.

@trissim
trissim merged commit 7d24163 into main Nov 13, 2026
1 of 2 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants