Fix section-limited search in single-page documents#379
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Link to issue number:
N/A
Summary of the issue:
Searching within a specific section did not work correctly for single-page documents with a table of contents, such as EPUB/HTML-derived documents.
When a section was selected in the search dialog, Bookworm still searched the full document because
PageRangeControl.get_text_range()returned the root document range whenever the document had only one page.Description of how this pull request fixes the issue:
This changes the section search range calculation so that, when a specific section is selected, Bookworm searches from that section's start position up to the next non-descendant section.
If no section-specific range can be determined, the existing fallback behavior is preserved.
Testing performed:
uv run --no-sync pytest tests/test_search.py -q-> 1 passeduv run --no-sync pytest -q-> 134 passedKnown issues with pull request:
None known.