Hello, it's me again with the "quickload" saga questions, anyone have an idea how it's like that ? On purpose feature?
The answer is "because natural sorting for lists was never implemented in Kontakt". I have no info on if this will change or when.
So you are telling me we have artificial intelligence in 2023 but we can’t figure out a way of having 10 after 9?
IT IS nonsence in the sens that user experience is making the machine adapt to us and no the opposite
And btw windows folders don’t behave like that. The quick load folder in windows explorer shows 10 after 9
While the explanations of why it is logical to sort the way shown in the OP are valid, they miss the point.
Mac Finder sorts folder names that begin with string representations of numbers as though they begin with numbers.
This is because there are two possible logical contexts. One is computer logic, where they are strings and should be sorted as strings. The other is human logic, where they begin with numbers and should be sorted as such.
Which sorting to apply is dependent on which logic should apply. In a case like this, human logic should apply – the GUI part of software is written for people, not computers. As a software developer I understand this, and would sort numerically (with additional string sorting for any that begin with identical numbers).
Some people may see this as adding unnecessary complexity and potentially introducing problems elsewhere in the software because something somewhere might expect the data sorted as strings. But it's not complex at all. In terms of level of complexity in software development, it is one of the simplest things to apply number based sorting for graphical representations and string sorting for non-humans.
So yes, the user can enforce human-focused ordering by prepending a 0. This is so ingrained in me from years of Windows doing it wrong (using string sorting) and having tracks in my music collection incorrectly ordered if I did not, that I do it by habit. But this doesn't mean the software is doing the right thing. Software intended for human use should consider the needs of the human user and take all reasonable steps to meet those needs.
@Sunborn
those are "western mathematics", in the same way you have the, totally strange and illogical habit when you writing dates, to put the month before (!!!) the day
It is not western, just anglosaxon... It is used just in english speaking countries. And maybe even not all. I agree, it is rather strange to use such a ordering. But they have much more pecularities, like imperial measures and weights, driving on left and so on.
By the way, one satelite has smashed to Mars surface few years ago, because SW has been developed by two groups one working with metric system and the other imperial.... And they forgot to make conversion when data were exchanged between those parts....
Natural sorting is not remotely dangerous. With natural sorting I know exactly how things will be sorted. I also know how they will be sorted with strict text sorting. The difference is that the former offers no surprises to a human familiar with the number system in use. The latter is a surprise in this context, because it goes against the way we expect numbers (which is how humans see them regardless of the internal computer representation) should behave. So even though we understand how text sorting works, there is a conflict because we see numbers treated as text.
Your comments about suggesting to extend it are a perfect example of inventing imaginary scenarios to support a weak argument. No one is asking for any of that, and none of those are reasonable expectations. Sorting things that look like numbers as numbers is reasonable.
Software intended to be used by humans should not be written as though a machine is the primary audience.
You miss the simple point that a human programmed software and likely has simply not considered setting how to display results so it is sorted in a logical way not natural.
This is all off the point anyway, fact is this is how it is working, it works this way in many cases (even Windows) and so a simple workaround if it bothers the OP is just add a zero.
Sorry, but those are "western mathematics", in the same way you have the, totally strange and illogical habit when you writing dates, to put the month before (!!!) the day (Which for us, here in the Mediterranean is totally incomprehensible, by the way)! ^_^
Nothing to do with "Western Maths", it is simply how code sorts strings.
I am Australian and I do NOT put Month before Date. Not all Western countries are within the United States nor use all the same formats as America does.... I also use metric system.
@JesterMgee
I appreciate that you're (from your point of view) just stating that this is the way it works at the moment. But since you addressed my comments… please take this as a well-intentioned clarification of what I was saying and not meant as an attack on you.
You can get yourself lost in a sea of regex expressions trying to make everything appear as every individual would expect in a list, someone will always have a different idea.
Which is why you don't implement every ill-considered idea. None of this has to do with sorting numbers the way humans expect numbers to be sorted.
Hexadecimal, especially when dealing with binary stuff is an expected notation I would have, but usually this is not counted as a number.
People do not usually write and order lists using hexadecimal. Your example is an edge case, which as you say is not a normal way of sorting, nor is it something that is used often, unlike common everyday numbers.
I did not miss that point. EvilDragon made that point and I repeated it. I have acknowledged that this is the way it works at the moment. Also that I use the 'leading zero' approach because I do not trust software to have always been implemented with a properly human focused UI. My replies were to the arguments that this is the way it should work and that using natural sorting is a bad idea. As you say
I love how people argue over nothing
I've had the same thought from the opposite perspective – how much effort some have put into arguing against making a human focused UI, complete with imaginary scenarios and extreme edge cases that no one would reasonably expect to be supported and weren't asked for.
I don't really care about any of this that much (well, the new scaling feature is welcomed, though if you're running at a normal resolution like 1440p it's not vital, and not having it never stopped me making music).
I commented initially more out of amusement that anyone would think natural sorting is undesirable. Also hasn't stopped me making music. So yeah, no whining here, just a slightly amused fascination.
Here we go, the eternal argument of « it won’t stop you making music »
True. And also irrelevant. We are not talking about making music, in fact we are not talking about music at all here. We are talking about softwares.
we are talking about a company selling software to clients. So there’s 3 keywords here : « software, company, client ». Things that involve money, expectations, features, innovation, work.
I DO use roman numbers and it is used on many ocasions.... In contracts, books, scientic articles, numbering floors, rooms, expressing year, ...
And these are all valid uses in context of audio software GUIs?
Custom software for those applications can use Roman numeral ordering. It's not complicated.
But simply, there are many ways to order things
There is in general one way (per number system in use) to order numbers that is human focused and behaves the way humans expect numbers to be sorted. I acknowledge that some systems such as Chinese have variations. This is not an insurmountable problem. I merely requires different rules which will be understood by anyone capable of understanding those number systems when written by hand (or typed into a text document).
"Natural ordering" seems to be OK for me, if there is ISO standard how to do it and companies would strictly stick to that. I really do not want to seek file in thousands of files in situation when it is sorted in the way programmer has decided it is natural...
It may not be an ISO standard, but I don't think we really need one to make it clear that the algorithm sorts numbers the way humans do. I don't know and have never met anyone who doesn't understand that without needing a standard. The decision for how natural sorting works wasn't a programmer decision divorced from all other considerations. It was a recognition of how humans sort these things. It is well understood and can not be arbitrarily changed, because a deviation from the established way will no longer be natural sorting.
At this point I have to conclude you're either completely misunderstanding the context of the discussion, or wilfully refusing to so that you can make a point.
@sunborn Yes you are right. And it didn't stop me from making music and from loving the process, even with old tools. I am young yes (29), but I was always attracted to the concept of workflow, which for me is the seamless osmosis between the human and its tool. And If I get into a heated argument, it's just passion speaking :)
BTW, happens in windows too, I guess we can argue what is and is not normal, but this is where people differ, code is code
This is likely due to the fact the folder names do not start with a number, so the rules on how to sort are broken but it still works when you consider logic in how things are being sorted, just not natural logic.
Hexadecimal, especially when dealing with binary stuff is an expected notation I would have, but usually this is not counted as a number. Roman numerals I would not expect but hex yes, in old days on XP there was a registry mod to allow explorer to order by hex and I needed to do that as SFX libraries I was creating started with a hex number for the ID and it was desired to see files listed in this order but this was not a "normal" way of sorting.
It is not nonsence, it is correct order for string of 'signs'.... 10 is not mathematical ten, it is sign 1 followed by sign 0. 1 is not mathematical one, it is sign 1.
That is a common nonsense, not only on many programs and applications but in Windows too! (maybe on MAC too, i don't know...)
The only way to avoid this nonsense is to use 0 before the first 9 numbers:
01, 02, 03, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09, 10, 11 etc. etc.
Most of programs do not use "natural sorting". And if they do not, one may use 0 prefix to help program to order strings as "expected".
"Natural sorting" is rather dangerous concept, as one newer knows how exactly items will be sorted....
Because, once someone may suggest, let's expand it a bit further. Include date, time, roman numbers (yes, chapters are still sometimes numbered using roman numbers, or articles in contracts, floors and so on...), numbers expressed by word, whatever else, .....
Good to know Win has started use it, if I will not be able to find the file, at 'normal' possition I will have a look at 'natural' possition. ;-)
