starred/terminal
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/microsoft/terminal.git synced 2026-02-04 05:35:20 +00:00
Code Issues 19.0k Packages Projects Releases 20 Wiki Activity

When arranging panes using settings.json startupActions, add support for additional pane arrangements #13693

New Issue
Closed
opened 2026-01-31 03:49:37 +00:00 by claunia · 3 comments
claunia commented 2026-01-31 03:49:37 +00:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @dipique on GitHub (Apr 30, 2021).

Description of the new feature/enhancement

I would like to initialize my terminal with two panes on top, and one pane on the bottom, but this is impossible with the current implementation of startupActions in settings.json.

If I split horizontally, then vertically (sp -H `; sp), I get one pane on the left, two on the right. If I split vertically, then horizontally (sp `; sp -H), I get one pane on top, two on the bottom.

More generally: with three panes (one pane + two splits), there are 4 arrangement permutations (2 splits * 2 orientations); but there are 6 rectangular arrangements of 3 panes; thus, there are 2 inaccessible arrangements(2 top 1 bottom, and 2 left 1 right).

  • 3 horizontal (sp -H `; sp -H)
  • 3 vertical (sp `; sp)
  • 1 left 2 right (sp -H `; sp)
  • 1 top 2 bottom (sp `; sp -H)
  • 2 top 1 bottom (unsupported)
  • 2 left 1 right (unsupported)

This request is to add support for those two inaccessible (via settings.json) arrangements.

Note that these arrangements CAN be created manually once Windows Terminal has opened. This is because when open, the option to split panes splits the focused pane, whereas during startup, splitting panes splits the last (highest index?) pane. Thus, I can split vertically, select the top pane, and then split it horizontally to get 2 top 1 bottom.

Proposed technical implementation details (optional)

When I tried to accomplish 2 top 1 bottom for myself, I did so by setting the focused tab, like this:

"startupActions": "sp -H `; ft -t 0 `; sp"

This didn't work, of course, but my suggestion would be to support this method, meaning to respect focus when splitting panes during startup. Advantages as I see them:

  • It doesn't break existing configurations
  • It mimics how a user would accomplish this in the UI, so it's trivial for a user to create even very complex arrangements by noting the steps to do it manually
  • It leverages existing paradigms (e.g. pane focus) and thus doesn't require new parameters, options, or user education
  • It effectively addresses the issue even when many more panes are added without allowing the increased permutative complexity to effect the complexity of parsing OR writing the configuration arguments.
Originally created by @dipique on GitHub (Apr 30, 2021). # Description of the new feature/enhancement I would like to initialize my terminal with two panes on top, and one pane on the bottom, but this is impossible with the current implementation of `startupActions` in `settings.json`. If I split horizontally, then vertically (``sp -H `; sp``), I get one pane on the left, two on the right. If I split vertically, then horizontally (``sp `; sp -H``), I get one pane on top, two on the bottom. More generally: with three panes (one pane + two splits), there are 4 arrangement permutations (2 splits * 2 orientations); but there are 6 rectangular arrangements of 3 panes; thus, there are 2 inaccessible arrangements(2 top 1 bottom, and 2 left 1 right). - 3 horizontal (``sp -H `; sp -H``) - 3 vertical (``sp `; sp``) - 1 left 2 right (``sp -H `; sp``) - 1 top 2 bottom (``sp `; sp -H``) - 2 top 1 bottom (**unsupported**) - 2 left 1 right (**unsupported**) This request is to add support for those two inaccessible (via `settings.json`) arrangements. Note that these arrangements CAN be created manually once Windows Terminal has opened. This is because when open, the option to split panes splits the focused pane, whereas during startup, splitting panes splits the last (highest index?) pane. Thus, I can split vertically, select the top pane, and then split it horizontally to get 2 top 1 bottom. # Proposed technical implementation details (optional) When I tried to accomplish 2 top 1 bottom for myself, I did so by setting the focused tab, like this: `` "startupActions": "sp -H `; ft -t 0 `; sp"`` This didn't work, of course, but my suggestion would be to support this method, meaning to respect focus when splitting panes during startup. Advantages as I see them: - It doesn't break existing configurations - It mimics how a user would accomplish this in the UI, so it's trivial for a user to create even very complex arrangements by noting the steps to do it manually - It leverages existing paradigms (e.g. pane focus) and thus doesn't require new parameters, options, or user education - It effectively addresses the issue even when many more panes are added without allowing the increased permutative complexity to effect the complexity of parsing OR writing the configuration arguments.
claunia added the Issue-FeatureResolution-Duplicate labels 2026-01-31 03:49:38 +00:00
claunia commented 2026-01-31 03:49:39 +00:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@zadjii-msft commented on GitHub (May 3, 2021):

You actually can acocmplish this today, with the move-focus subcommand. So for your original example:

two panes on top, and one pane on the bottom,

That would be something like

wt sp -H ; move-focus up ; sp -V

Then there's also /dup #5464 Add support for focus-pane

@zadjii-msft commented on GitHub (May 3, 2021): You actually can acocmplish this today, with the `move-focus` subcommand. So for your original example: > two panes on top, and one pane on the bottom, That would be something like ``` wt sp -H ; move-focus up ; sp -V ``` Then there's also /dup #5464 Add support for `focus-pane`
claunia commented 2026-01-31 03:49:40 +00:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@ghost commented on GitHub (May 3, 2021):

Hi! We've identified this issue as a duplicate of another one that already exists on this Issue Tracker. This specific instance is being closed in favor of tracking the concern over on the referenced thread. Thanks for your report!

@ghost commented on GitHub (May 3, 2021): Hi! We've identified this issue as a duplicate of another one that already exists on this Issue Tracker. This specific instance is being closed in favor of tracking the concern over on the referenced thread. Thanks for your report!
claunia commented 2026-01-31 03:49:40 +00:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@dipique commented on GitHub (May 3, 2021):

Thank you!

@dipique commented on GitHub (May 3, 2021): Thank you!
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag Specified
Branches Tags
Labels
Clear labels
⛺ Reserved
A11yCO
A11yMAS
A11ySev1
A11ySev2
A11ySev3
A11yTTValidated
A11yUsable
A11yVoiceAccess
A11yWCAG
Area-Accessibility
Area-AtlasEngine
Area-AzureShell
Area-Build
Area-Build
Area-Chat
Area-CmdPal
Area-CodeHealth
Area-Commandline
Area-CookedRead
Area-DefApp
Area-Extensibility
Area-Fonts
Area-GroupPolicy
Area-i18n
Area-Input
Area-Interaction
Area-Interop
Area-Localization
Area-Output
Area-Performance
Area-Portable
Area-Quality
Area-Remoting
Area-Rendering
Area-Schema
Area-Server
Area-Settings
Area-SettingsUI
Area-ShellExtension
Area-ShellExtension
Area-ShellExtension
Area-Suggestions
Area-Suggestions
Area-TerminalConnection
Area-TerminalControl
Area-Theming
Area-UserInterface
Area-VT
Area-Windowing
Area-WPFControl
AutoMerge
Blocking-Ingestion
Culprit-Centennial
Culprit-WinUI
Disability-All
Disability-Blind
Disability-LowVision
Disability-Mobility
External-Blocked-WinUI3
Fixed
Gathering-Data
good first issue
HCL-E+D
HCL-WindowsTerminal
Help Wanted
Impact-Compatibility
Impact-Compliance
Impact-Correctness
Impact-Visual
In-PR
InclusionBacklog
InclusionBacklog-Windows TerminalWin32
InclusionCommitted-202206
Issue-Bug
Issue-Docs
Issue-Feature
Issue-Feature
Issue-Question
Issue-Samples
Issue-Scenario
Issue-Task
Needs-Attention
Needs-Author-Feedback
Needs-Bisect
Needs-Discussion
Needs-Repro
Needs-Tag-Fix
Needs-Tag-Fix
Needs-Triage
No-Recent-Activity
Priority-0
Priority-1
Priority-2
Priority-3
Product-Cmd.exe
Product-Colortool
Product-Colortool
Product-Colortool
Product-Conhost
Product-Conpty
Product-Meta
Product-Powershell
Product-Terminal
Product-WSL
pull-request
Mirrored from GitHub Pull Request
 Resolution-Answered
Resolution-By-Design
Resolution-Duplicate
Resolution-External
Resolution-Fix-Available
Resolution-Fix-Committed
Resolution-No-Repro
Resolution-Won't-Fix
Severity-Blocking
Severity-Crash
Severity-DataLoss
spam
this-will-be-a-breaking-change
Tracking-External
WindowsTerminal_Win32
Work-Item
zAskModeBug
zInbox-Bug
No Label Issue-Feature Resolution-Duplicate
Milestone
No items
No Milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
claunia
No Assignees
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: starred/terminal#13693
Delete Branch "%!s()"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?