Aah, glad to hear it re: multi-select. Wrapping quotes around the Title entry let me add the date in there, that’s perfect, thank you. And thanks for the suggestions regarding the lists. Testing a few different spacing variations real quick, this addresses some of the issues, but not all of them.
I think it’s a just an issue with the preview rendering since both HTML exports properly treat everything as a loose list. I’ll make a post in the bug section.
there are potential use cases that Deepdwn isn’t designed for, and that might include: tens of thousands of markdown files that Deepdwn needs to be aware of and parse, with millions of words
Can’t fault you for thinking this way. I happen to think the value of Deepdwn’s organizational features only goes up as it encompasses larger and larger bodies of files. Incidentally, it was actually significantly fewer files. I screwed up:
I forgot about the images. Only about 4.3MB of that 25MB group of directories were .md files. Images made up about 165KB per 200KB directory. Anyway, the 25MB point was just the size at which the program became wholly inoperable. The program became uncomfortably sluggish at roughly 5MB total/1MB Markdown, and was basically unusable but still technically responding at 15MB total/3MB Markdown.
I’m concerned about the performance because my personal writing directory sits at just over 12MB in .txt/.md files. Certainly no Tolstoy, since that represents almost, god help me, 10 years of wildly varied activity levels. Too much to organize in Deepdwn using the normal file settings though. I don’t think it’s unusual for people to have a standing base of documents they may want to use with Deepdwn, and I don’t think 3MB of files is so outlandish a number either.
However! Today I discovered that turning off file system monitoring mostly eliminates the performance issues up to, so far, 3MB of Markdown files. I’m going to keep pushing it and integrating more of my doc dir’s subdirs until I hit a limit (if there is one in this mode). This should be workable for now. I think anything lost from not having the file system monitored will be worth it in terms of overall usability, though it’ll be nice to hopefully have that again too in the future. Also, I can feel comfortable recommending this to more prolific friends again, which is great.
All that said, I wholeheartedly agree with this:
Great! If it isn’t a good fit for you now, I hope that it will be some day in the future (and hopefully before 2030).
This is the last you’ll hear out of me on the performance front, since harping on about it would be both rude and a waste of our time. (Though I still think it’s very important.) Thank you for your patience and your explanations.