I have two windows in my application (document based), a main and secondary window. I want to keep the secondary window behind the main window unless the user clicks on it or the main window decides to show it (via a user pressed button).
The issue is that the secondary window has a modal sheet which makes it come to the foreground. I want to stop it from doing that.
Current solution:
Before the sheet appears I increase the main window's level by 1
After the sheet is done I decrease the main window's level by 1
Problems:
My timing of knowing when these sheets occur is bad and unreliable
The window flickers a bit
Notes:
I have tried making the secondary window a child window of the main one, however this links them too strongly, where dragging one drags the other and I do want the secondary window to surface when the user clicks on it.
Related
I have seen several tools adding a custom button and/or drawing on the title bar of all windows of all applications in Windows. How is that done?
Extra points for an example in Delphi.
EDIT:
I found something for dotNET that does this:
http://www.thecodeking.co.uk/2007/09/adding-caption-buttons-to-non-client.html#.VdmioEDenqQ
How I see this job:
First of all we should be able to paint this button on the our own window caption. This procedure will be used later
This part of the program enumerates the active and visible windows
This part of the program using injection attach our dll to enumerated windows
From injected dll we can draw the button on the window caption
Inside this dll we should process the click on the button
We should have mechanism to send result to our main program
I haven't done this, so the following is what I would investigate if I were to try:
For each application / each top-level window:
Create a floating window and position it over the title bar wherever you want it to sit. Set up the parent / child relationship, but this window is part of your own process. (There are occasionally problems parenting a window from one process to one from another process, but try. I'd avoid injecting into other processes if possible.)
You can investigate the window flags to see if the window has a title bar (ie if you should add a button) via GetWindowLong with GWL_STYLE looking for WS_CAPTION. The same call will also let you see the type of caption / frame, which you can combine with GetSystemMetrics with, eg, SM_CYDLGFRAME to figure out the right size for your button on this specific window's title bar.
This window is now your button: paint, handle clicks etc as appropriate.
Make it a non-focusable window so that clicks to it don't take focus away from the window is is on the title bar of. You don't want clicking it to make the title bar change colour, for example. Do this by setting the WS_EX_NOACTIVATE window flag, something like: SetWindowLong(Handle, GWL_EXSTYLE, GetWindowLong(Handle, GWL_EXSTYLE) orWS_EX_NOACTIVATE).
The main problem is to keep it positioned correctly when the window moves, is resized, etc. To do this, install a hook for the system move events. You can also hook minimize and restore via EVENT_SYSTEM_MINIMIZESTART and EVENT_SYSTEM_MINIMIZEEND. This will allow you to keep track of all windows moving around onscreen, such that you can adjust the button-window position if necessary.
That gives you a window which you can paint as a button (and respond to clicks etc), that visually is "attached" to other windows so it stays in the same place as the user drags the title bar, minimizes or maximises the app, etc, and that is in your own process without cross-process problems.
I'm looking to hide a window on OSX (not belonging to my app), but not the rest of the application. I have tried simply moving the window off the screen (like I would do in Windows), but the api always positions it at least 20 pixels away from the edge (#annoying).
Other things I have thought of:
Setting the opacity of the window to zero (can this be done?)
Minimizing the window, but it appears that the window handle becomes null once the window is minimized, so might be hard to get back
Setting the window level (i.e. desktop) or z order (can this be done?)
Moving the window to a different workspace (can this be done?)
Does anyone know of a way to do this?
I have a semi-transparent form (using AlphaBlend) that acts as an overlay. For the user to still be able to interact with the window below I have set WS_EX_NOACTIVATE on my form so all right and left clicks go through to the other window.
However I have a few clickable labels on my form. Clicking those and performing the appropriate action works fine since despite the WS_EX_NOACTIVATE flag the OnClick methods are called, but the click will (obviousely) also propagate to the other window, which I do not want in this case.
So, does anyone know how to "stop" the click being sent through to the window below in case I already handled it in my form ? Basically I would like being able to chose whether the click "belongs to me" and does not get propagated or whether the window below mine receives it.
As Rob explained, WS_EX_NOACTIVATE is not relevant here. Most likely you used WS_EX_TRANSPARENT and that made your window transparent to mouse clicks.
To get finer grained control of mouse click transparency, handle the WM_NCHITTEST message in your top level window. Return HTTRANSPARENT for regions that you want to be "click through". Otherwise return, for example, HTCLIENT.
Wm_ex_NoActivate should be irrelevant here. That just controls whether your window receives the input focus. Indeed, if you start with a scratch program and do nothing but change the extended window style, you'll see that when you click within the bounds of that program's window, the clicks are handled in the usual way, except that the window is never activated; programs behind that window do not receive any click events.
Therefore, to make your label controls eat click events instead of forwarding them to the windows behind them, you need to find out what you did to make them start forwarding those messages and simply stop doing that, whatever that is.
If the user zooms our app's main window, closes the app, then reopens it, we want to restore the last state of the main window, so we zoom it before showing the window. The app opens zoomed, so everything is great.
However, if the user clicks the zoom button again, nothing happens. I believe this is because the documentation for zoom: says for step 5:
Determines a new frame. If the window is currently in the standard
state, the new frame represents the user state, saved during a
previous zoom. If the window is currently in the user state, the new
frame represents the standard state, computed in step 1 above. If
there is no saved user state because there has been no previous zoom,
the size and location of the window do not change.
I think it doesn't unzoom because there's no user state, but I'm not sure why - shouldn't the user state be "the size the windows was at before it was zoomed"? If not, how can I make sure the user state is set properly so that the window un-zooms when the user clicks the zoom button again?
Edit: MrGomez responds below that this is basically how it's meant to work. This doesn't seem to be how other apps behave, though. Try Safari - Zoom it, then quit, then reopen the window, and it restores at the zoomed size. Click the zoom button and it goes back to a smaller size. iCal is the same. How are those apps doing it?
The trouble is, this is the expected behavior. As you mentioned here:
we want to restore the last state of the main window, so we zoom it
before showing the window
You've gone ahead and set the user's view as your standard view. The original default view has not been preserved.
This thread goes into detail about the expected functionality of zoom:. Quoting the accepted answer:
According to the documentation for the zoom: method (note the :), the
inverse of zoom: is zoom::
This action method toggles the size and location of the window between
its standard state (provided by the application as the “best” size to
display the window’s data) and its user state (a new size and location
the user may have set by moving or resizing the window).
If it's in the user state (not zoomed), it'll change to the standard
state (zoom), and if it's in the standard state (zoomed), it'll change
to the user state (unzoom).
The documentation also notes:
If there is no saved user state because there has been no previous
zoom, the size and location of the window do not change.
This is what will happen if you started the window out in its standard
state; since it was never in any other state, there is nothing for it
to unzoom back to.
The trouble is you've overrided the standard state; zoom:'s purpose is to toggle between the user's view and your interface's standard view. To save a user's window state for later restore, follow this guide.
And, for reference, here's the remainder of OSX's style guidelines and a very good tutorial for how you should work with this restriction.
Edit: As discussed, this is also a question of UI modality and the fact OSX windows may be bimodal (user state, maximized state) or trimodal (user state, standard state, maximized state) with a loss of the user state when an application is closed in maximized state. This appears to reproduce itself with stock-standard applications for OSX, including, for example, iCal.app.
As a result, the best that can be done here is to define a functioning UI paradigm that's consistent with applications for OSX, but carries many of the same idiosyncrasies of the little green glob.
I am trying to insert a custom widget into the Internet Explorer 8 url bar, next to the stop and reload buttons. This is just a personal productivity enhancer for myself.
The "window model" for this part of the IE frame is an "address bar root" window that owns the windows which comprise the IE8 url bar: an edit box, a combo control, and the stop and reload buttons.
From another process, I create a new WS_CHILD window (with a custom class name) that is parented by IE's address bar root window, thus making it a sibling of the edit box and stop/reload. I call SetWindowPos with an hwndInsertAfter of HWND_TOP to make sure it appears "above" (i.e. "in") the urlbar. This works nicely, and I see my window painted initially inside the IE urlbar.
However, when I activate the IE window, the urlbar edit control jumps back in front of my window. I know this is happening because I still see my window painted behind the urlbar, and because when I print ->GetTopWindow() to the debug console on a timer, it becomes the HWND of the urlbar edit control.
If I update my message loop to call SetWindowPos with HWND_TOP on WM_PAINT, things are better -- now when I activate the IE window and move it around, my control properly stays planted above the edit control in the urlbar. However, as soon as I switch between IE tabs, which updates the text of IE's urlbar Edit control, my control shift backs behind the Edit control. (Note: This also happens when I maximize or restore the window.)
So my questions are:
1) Is it likely that IE is intentionally putting its urlbar edit control back on top of the z-order every time you click on a tab in IE, or is there a gap in my understanding of how Windows painting and z-ordering works? My understanding is that once you specify z-ordering of child windows (which are not manipulable by the end-user), that ordering should remain until programmatically changed. So even though IE is repainting its Edit control upon tab selection whereas I am not repainting or otherwise acting upon my window, my window should stil remain firmly on top.
2) Given that the z-order of my window is apparently changing, shouldn't it receive a WM_WINDOWPOSCHANGING/WM_WINDOWPOSCHANGED? If it did, I could at least respond to that event and keep myself on top of the Edit control. But even though I can see my window painting behind the urlbar Edit control when I click on a tab, and even though my debug window output confirms that the address bar root's GetTopWindow() becomes the HWND of the Edit control when I click on a tab, and even though I see WM_WINDOWPOSCHANGING/WM_WINDOWPOSCHANGED being sent to the Edit control with an hwndInsertAfter of HWND_TOP when I click on a tab, my own window receives no messages whatsoever that would allow me to keep the z-order constant. This seems wrong to me, and addressing it would force me to run in IE's process and hook all messages sent to its Edit control just to have an event to respond to :(
Thank you for your help!
It's quite likely that IE is juggling the Z-order of the controls when you change tabs. In IE9, the URL bar and the tabs have a common parent. When you select a new tab, it activates the URL bar (and activation usually brings the window to the top of its local Z order).
No. You get WM_WINDOWPOSCHANGED when a SetWindowPos function acts on your window. If some of the siblings have their z-orders changed, you don't get a message. Nobody called SetWindowPos on your window. You can see this by writing a test program that juggles the z-order of some child windows.
This makes sense because there might be an arbitrary number of sibling windows, and it could be an unbounded amount of overhead to notify all of them. It also would be nearly impossible to come up with a consistent set of rules for delivering these messages to all the siblings given that some of the siblings could react by further shuffling the z-order. Do the siblings that haven't yet received the first notification now have two pending notifications? Do they get posted or dispatched immediately? What if the queue grows and grows until it overflows?
This is different from WM_KILLFOCUS/WM_SETFOCUS notifications in that it affects, at most, two windows. That puts a reasonable bound on the number of notifications. Even if there's a runaway infinite loop because the losing control tries to steal the focus back, the queue won't overflow because there's only one SetFocus call for each WM_KILLFOCUS delivered.
Also, it's reasonable that windows might need to react to a loss of focus. It's much less likely that window C needs to know that B is now on top of A instead of the other way around, so why design the system to send a jillion unnecessary messages?
Hacking the UI of apps you don't control and that don't have well-defined APIs for doing the types of things you want to do is anywhere from hard to impossible, and it's always fragile. Groups that put out toolbars and browser customizations employee more people than you might expect, and they spend much of their day probing with Spy++ and experimenting. It is by nature hacking.