Hidden/system files + folders (incl. icons) ghosted/greyed out

[Anonymous]

I miss the option (should be activated in standard) to show the hidden/system files and folder (incl. icons) ghosted/greyed out and/or at least in another color.

[Anonymous]

Hello Mathias,

I have found this fitting posting:

http://forum.multicommander.com/forum/index.php/topic,393.msg1056.html#msg1056

How far is the progress on this?

Whereby I still prefer the ghosted/greyed out hidden/system files, folders and icons, would be much more nicer than just coloring the font.

[Mathias (Author)]

The color item by filter rules is still in design and planing stage.

I had some plans for this (grayed out) on system/hidden files. But had some problem with it. But it was a long time ago, So that might be possible to add now.

But there are also some other problems that must be consider when adding grey out. What color to use? Should the color be configurable? or should it just use a lighter then the default color? if the default color already is white, should it make it darken then? or should it change the font to italic or bold? or should that be an option? or... or...

But I have it on my list and will do some test later to see how it can work.

[Jungle]

I like how coloring is done in "alternative file manager", where color scheme is just a search template. So there's no need to separate e.g. files and folders settings - all flags (incl. system/hidden) could be chosen in template. But at least one thing could be improved: a possibility to check/uncheck color templates. So if i have 100 templates i can choose which to use for coloring because using them all could waste a lot of resources and time and make MC slow and unresponsive.

And you don't have to think about parameters a user may set. If somebody sets all colors to white and get blank panel - it's not you problem. Everyone should be careful. Moreover, it is always possible to reset settings to defaults.

P.S. I like the idea of applying font style. E.g. italic. Though the perfomance tests shoud be done

[Mathias (Author)]

If the filter based coloring also can match if a file is in focus/select then Yes, you might be able to use the filter based colors instead of the separate file/folder selected/normal/.. settings,

But I think the current coloring will still be there as a base. and used by default. Maybe make it so they can be disabled if you only want to use the filter based. 
I do not want to replace the current way with the filter based, because filter based colors is a lot slower. I notice that already with the color you can set based on file name. So I made it do the coloring in the background, so that it would not hold up the GUI.

[Jungle]

IMHO there is no need at all to separate focus/select settings for different conditions.
Although i don't know how the coloring is currently handled, it seems to me that a difference can't be dramatic as long as file panel shows limited amount of files. Moreover, coloring might be cached in some way. E.g. when the items are shown in panel at first time, they are compared (with color template) and template IDs are saved in some table. Then later there would not be need in comparing.

[Mathias (Author)]

Some caching can of course be done. But it might slow down the navigation speed when going fast in/out of folders before color data has been cached.

But when filtered coloring is implemented. Then I will notice how fast it is and if the normal should be removed or change or whatever.

I also think that filtered coloring is harder to configure. It is also easy to make error. easy to create conflicting rules.

But Im going to start with just adding filtered coloring, and then we can see if it works good, so that the standard coloring can be disabled or changed.