Inquiring as to the reason(s) why the Trainer Manager isn't able to recursively scan subfolders for trainers under it's current location. I suspect that it goes along with the reasoning for the 350 display limit, in that recursion would probably slow down functionality and cause more problems in the long run, especially if someone has a large amount of trainers and/or complex folder names that could generate issues. Just a curiosity question I don't think's been asked before, or I couldn't find the official answer to.
That's not the reason.
that many trainers with all the interactivity and buttons on each trainer listed and a huge scrolling list of them is a lot of polling and CPU
in today's modern world, executables are given more priority and are treated differently by windows defender, malware bytes, anti virus, malware scanners, etc. Practically everything security related.
This means that each of them, just polling them or trying to gather a list of them, or reading data out of them to post them into the trainer manager with proper information, the cpu and the computer in general gets sluggish and slowed down by the heuristic and general scanning going on. It's literally the bottle neck. The fewer folders and recursive anything we are doing the better. It's also why we used non .exe files to keep track of things once the trainers have been collected.
Also note that the Trainers folder has other folders in it already to collect certain information.
Third, there is a new api call coming in future versions that detects when file is being added or removed, and not sure how to recursively make this work..
I doubt I will be doing complex folder ability in the future, but I can look into it, or how it will affect the performance of the program. You CAN name programs however you like (use prefix ahead of .exe to denote this or that). Also, all the normal functions of windows (search folder, typing a single letter or combination of letters in the folder) all work. The POINT of the trainer manager is literally to handle all this for you and organize it, etc. But I do see the value in being able to organize them in certain groups as you see fit in the folder.
At any rate, I am still working on this, as it is an important system in the TM, when I have extra time, which has been precious little.
Thanks for your suggestion, however.
best,
Cal