+299

Ability to sort deleted items to make it easier to find for reuse

Arthur Joyce 11 jaar geleden bijgewerkt door Kent Pavelka 8 jaar geleden 9

There's no sense in retyping a deleted item that is used over and over again. But finding the item in the deleted list is really difficult if the list is long. The ability to sort alphabetically would be of great use in saving time and making the app easier to use.

+6
Great idea. Everything would be much easier.
+9
i just posted something the like to the devs.. as i am a lazy guy i just copy-n-paste my request here:


pls make the sort-order of the "bought"-items changeable..
atm its fix sorted by "last checked off the to-buy list"
but THIS makes it hard do find items in the "bought"-list and click them to relist them in the to-buy list .. especially when you have a lots of items in that list ..

i tend to REUSE the shopping list . instead of typing another one.. guess thats the way its intended to be..

Best would be: make an option so the user can change (on the fly) the sort order between:

  • date last bought/clicked (default atm)
  • alphabetically by name
  • first by item-category (pls also show the category (ie coloring) in the bough-list)), then order by name
  • as another user suggested: most bought/clicked of first

Also it would be great that IF you add manually an Item which is already in the "bought"-listing that this would then get deleted . .else you end up with multiple same "bought"-items

Cheers
Thomas

+7

Yes. Please let it sort deleted items!!

+2

It is very convenient! Это было бы удобно!

+2

After using the app for awhile, I must report that without adopting this suggestion, the app is nearly unusable. Just too time consuming to search for an item in the crossed out list. This was first suggested 3 years ago. Doesn't appear you are interested in making this change. Could you reply if this is indeed the case

+1

It is clear that developers are no longer listening their users. This app is no longer part of my phone months ago.

I am unfollowing this thread now..

+1

YES! This is seriously a no-brainer, basic function and can't be that hard to program. I agree that without this function it is almost unusable, and is why I barely use anymore. Whenever I go to use, I get annoyed all over again. PLEASE FIX IT!

Developers won't do this. Two problems. 1. They obviously don't read these comments or are rude by not replying. 2. I've exchanged emails with them about this and their logic for keeping it as it is, is poor and intractable. Read: Hubris.