Your comments

1 - That's why I asked if there would be a case where natural sorting would produce incorrect results compared to lexicographic ('normal') sorting.

Regarding the term 'natural sorting': it's how this way of sorting is commonly described.

Regarding your happiness: surely this way of sorting could be disabled in your settings.

2 - Sure, there may be natural languages that use a different system to represent numbers that won't be accomodated by natural sorting. I don't think that should prevent Roman numerals from being sorted this way.

Regarding your last sentence:

Simple: perhaps for computers. Sublime is an editor for humans. Most humans consider the string '9' to come before the string '10', because those strings are representing numbers.

Clear: numeric parts of a string are compared numerically. That doesn't sound unclear to me.

Deterministic: why would it not be deterministic? Sorting would always result in the same order.

3 - That's a vague "anything that's different is wrong" argument. Can you come up with a concrete example?

Regarding bugs: anything can contain bugs, and bugs can be fixed.

@jan otte
What you consider to be a 'normal' sorting behavior may be different from what others consider to be normal.

Having humans pad numbers with zeroes is only done to accommodate lexicographical sorting. It's an extra cost and doesn't offer any benefit, other than compliance to an existing system.

There's nothing glitchy about natural number sorting. With natural number sorting, file names with fixed width numbers like the ones you're discussing will still be sorted the same.

Can you come up with a scenario where natural number sorting would result in sublime sorting incorrectly, but lexicographical sorting would not?


I too would like this sorting behavior in Sublime.

The Mac OS X Finder does sort this way:

Sublime currently sorts this way: