Adds option to display results as blocks

[dustinrb]

Adds option in the settings menu to change whether results are displayed inline (current behavior) or underneath using the type option in ink.Results. See JunoLab/atom-ink#93

[MikeInnes]

I'm fine with having this option. Any objections from anybody?

[pfitzseb]

Nope, LGTM.

[MikeInnes]

Thanks @dustinrb for the patch!

[marius311]

Happened to glance at this repo again today and super happy to see this PR (it was me asking about something like this in #199). Going to try it out now, thanks.

[pfitzseb]

You might also be interested in #283 then :)

[marius311]

Have been using this today and I have to say, I absolutely love it. It makes the info inside the outputs so much more useful since its now easy to read / expand. Thanks very much!

Here's some minor feedback I have since using it which is maybe of some use, but its really mostly minor.

• The grey hashed highlighting of a line that occurs when you evaluate it is in the wrong place if any of the above lines have outputs.

• Expanding an output can be kind of laggy, on my setup there's probably ~1 sec between clicking the expand button and when the lines below it shift down to make room.

• If there is no output from a command, it might be useful to have the check mark smaller or suppressed or maybe even inline like before. It takes up a lot space and kind of breaks up the code (which I know was basically exactly the criticism I think you guys had before on implementing this at all :), and for the check-mark at least, I think you're right)

(This is Ubuntu Atom/1.12.3 with Ink/4c98938 and julia-client/2c5e412)

[pfitzseb]

• Will look into that.
• I think this is an Atom core issue -- should hopefully get better with 1.13 afaik.
• What would you think about an "hybrid" mode which will display all single line and non-tree outputs inline and everything else as block results?

[marius311]

For my money, I'd say keep even single-line outputs as blocks. So that basically if I know a command has outputs, my brain is telling me "look below to see the result" whereas if I know if doesn't, I don't want to look at anything. With your idea, I also need to process whether to expect my output to be single-line or not to know where to look. So hybrid mode with only check-mark's inline would be interesting to me. Although maybe I'm just being too picky at this point.

[pfitzseb]

No, that makes sense.