The file is already opened in the notepad как исправить

Created:

2010-04-01

Updated:

2012-11-13

• 

  Today I managed to save a new file with the same name as the original file I had already open in Notepad++ and copied the contents from to the new document.

  I think this should not be allowed.
  A lot of issues with this can be thought of, although I didn’t run into any, nor did I try to. I was aware of the “problem”.

  For instance, it wouldn’t be clear which file would represent the last saved state of the document. Thinking of this, as far as I can recall I did not get any message about the original document having been changed when the new version/copy was saved with the same name.

  What was “correct”, was that after having closed both files, there was only one entry in the Recently Opened Files list.

• 

  What did you exactly do?

  I tried to reproduce the issue by
  * opening a file
  * creating a new doc
  * writing random stuff to it
  * attempt to save, choosing the other doc as target

  I got a message box asking me to confirm. Don’t you get the message box?

  CChris

• 

  Yes, of course, the file already exists so I will have to confirm. But that is not the issue. This would also be the case if I didn’t already have the same file open in Notepad++.

  The point is, I can have two documents (or more, I guess) in Notepad++ referring to the same actual file.
  I could make changes in any document and save them and not know which document is the same as the actual file.

  If I would have unsaved changes in any of them and would close Notepad++, I guess I would be asked if I wanted to save the changes (any number of times) and end up not knowing what actually would have been saved last.

• 

  You can have he same document opened once in each view for a single instance. If you have several instances with an active buffer pointing to the same file, you are in charge of concurrency issues.

  The latest versions of Notepad++ switch to the file they attempt to save on an exit. This will give you a clue if you can see some changes on the page being displayed.  If a file has been changed in one view but not the other, you’ll be proplted once, and the changed ersion ill be written if no cancellation occurs.

  Now the only issue imho: a file was changed in both views, and it is not obvious what set of changes is saved first. Please make a request describing how N++ is supposed to behave. My personal choice would be to cancel the save with a notification of the conflict between two versions of the file.

  CChris

• 

  Split-view is of course not an issue, because both are only views to the very same document (buffer).

  I think it should not be possible at all to have the same file (name) opened more than once inside a Notepad++ instance.

  It is possible to open multiple regular Notepad instances of the same file, but what is the use? Just from switching between the instances, you can’t really tell which instance contains which changes or versions. Perhaps you could get an impression from the position in the task bar menu. But who would want this confusion. In regular Notepad you even have no indication at all if the file contents have changed. You will only find out by closing the instance by a save message appearing or not.

  Of course, the issue of the ability to open multiple instances of the same file by using multiple instances of (several) editors will always remain. Most editors have a file-changed (outside of the editor) message with reload question, so this problem is (partially) solved.

  In Notepad++ however, what happens when the file has changed to multiple instances within a single Notepad++?

  First of all, the reload question(s) will only appear after returning from another application! So if I save several instances of a file (name), at first there will be no questions asked at all. I could make additional changes to any (other) instance of the file/document, save the instance, and still have no clue about which of the instances would contain the actual contents of the file.

  If I have switched to another application and return to Notepad++ I guess it would not be clear at all which instance of the document I am asked to reload or not (I didn’t try). It would be a good thing if, like the “save” question on exiting Notepad++, Notepad++ would also show the document it is asking to reload.

  But just to avoid all these issues (and possibly other issues caused by indicating documents by just using their filename), it would be best, most transparent and correct, to allow only one instance of the same file to be opened within the same Notepad++ instance.

• 

  And much more unpractical too.

  I routinely use N++ to view several parts of a file at the same time, using split views and wishing I could have three or four views sometimes. You get this by opening several instances, losing any vetical sync between different instances of course – I can’t think of a way to achieve this.

  You can’t open the same file twice in the same view, can you? So you have only two views of the same doc in the same N++ instance.

  When you edit a document in both views, you are not editing two temporary copies of a master document, in which case you’d actually need a three-way merge on save. Instead, there is a single file, a singe document instance, and you can type a character in one view and delete it in the other. So there is no conflict after all.

  Oh yes, there is. If you open a document in three different instances of N++ and save one of them, the other two will ask to reload, but the first request won’t know which of the other two instances changed the file. Sorry about this, but it looks a little outlandish.

  CChris

• 

  > You can’t open the same file twice in the same view, can you?
  > So you have only two views of the same doc in the same N++ instance.

  Split view is not the issue, again.

  Again:

  But just to avoid all these issues (and possibly other issues caused by indicating documents by just using their filename), it would be best, most transparent and correct, to allow only one instance of the same file to be opened within the same Notepad++ instance.

  What I am saying is that is should not be possible to save a new file with the same name as a file already open in Notepad++.

  When creating new copies, currently there is no limit to the number of files with the same name I can have open in Notepad++, possibly having all the problems mentioned above.

• 

  I think he means this:
  1. Create a new document and write some stuff.
  2. Save on desktop as “test.txt”
  3. Create another new document and write some different stuff.
  4. Save and replace the “test.txt” file previously saved.

  The two files are the exact same files, but two different buffers are used and therefore can cause problems. Especially if the user does not change applications to trigger a “modified file” search. Even then, you can then still edit either file and overwrite the other without knowing which is which. This can be done many times over to no end.

  Closing and reopening N++ only opened one of the two instances, but the ability to do the above still exists

  Solution? I’m not sure which is best. Here is what I have come up with.
    Maybe close the first rendition, and keep the new one that the user agreed to overwrite the file with.
    Merge both into the same buffer (potentially cause other problems, I’m not familiar with the code to know for certain)

  srbs

• 

  Ok, this one makes sense.

  Merging the two files may not be adequate at all. But indeed I’d report a bug stating that the above sequence leads to the same file being open in different buffers in the same viw, possibly unbeknownst to the user.

  CChris