Feature Request: setRangeAndGoto


#1

It would be great if MiraCheck could include an function “setRangeAndGoto” which is similar to the “resetRangeAndGoto” Function but instead of resetting all Lists between the current position and the goto-target it would set all items to be checked.

The Reset feature is great to implement going back in the progress (e.g. from “go around” to “before landing”, or from “after landing” to “before takeoff”). But the other way around would also be usefull when moving forward. For example, my C172 checklist contains both a “battery engine start” and a “gpu engine start” section (and a “normal” and “short field takeoff”). While I can allready add a goto at the end of the “battery engine start” section to skip the “gpu engine start” section, it would be even better if we could make Mira check the skipped sections (so they are considered completed). This would free us from the unwanted necessety to mark all alternative sections as “not mandatory” which doesn’t quite get the point as one list will always be mandatory, just not both at the same time.


#2

Thanks for the feedback. It’s something we will take a look at. It’s not exactly what you want, but if you didn’t know, if you press-and-hold a section title and it will check all items in the section. You can also say CHECK SECTION if using voice. Mira will make a snarky remark if you do. You can turn that off by turning Mira is Cynical OFF.


#3

Thanks, I know the ways to check whole sections but for e.g. saying “MIRA CHECK SECTION” isn’t possible as my checklist is implemented in a way that I don’t enter the section… my “before engine start” list ends with a selection item: “battery engine start” or “gpu engine start”, linking to the apropriate sections, which on their end both link to the next section “after engine start”… and for this it would be great to have the opposit of the resetRangeAndGoto-Functions, so that the section not to be used can automatically be checked while being skipped so it’s not marked as “open” in the overview.


#4

Thanks. It’s on the backlog as a potential future enhancement.