Im trying to make a simple OSX-like dock application using Haxe 3.1.3. I cant seem to work out how to make the main application window transparent (no titlebars, borders etc), as well as ignoring mouse events except on the icons themselves. Ideally no taskbar item either, just a system tray item.
I believe Haxe Windows target uses SDL, and am pretty sure that SDL can support this kind of behaviour? Im not sure how Neko target is compiled, or handles this... Is there some flags I can set in the Haxe application.xml or something like that? Or is this just not possible with the Haxe Windows or Neko targets?
EDIT
I Discovered that the Waxe haxelib, which can be compiled with Neko, has a bunch of flags in the Window.hx file - https://github.com/nmehost/waxe/blob/cd9739e007ed10918166588faf2339d623b22fc4/wx/Window.hx
These include such options as FRAME_NO_TASKBAR and BORDER_DOUBLE, which both work when passed as arguments to the wx.Frame.create() function in the Simple.hx Waxe sample project.
It also includes the flag TRANSPARENT_WINDOW, but this appears to do nothing. No idea why the other flags are working, but the TRANSPARENT_WINDOW flag doesnt.
In Openfl (it's openfl which uses sdl and a xml project), you can remove the window border with this in your application.xml:
<window borderless="true"/>
But I don't know a way to move the window without borders.
relevant discussion:
http://www.openfl.org/forums/#!/general:moving-borderless-windows
Related
I got filedialog called inside my main window with this code:
QAction *actionWithShortcut = new QAction();
actionWithShortcut->setShortcut(Qt::CTRL + Qt::Key_9);
actionWithShortcut->setShortcutContext(Qt::ShortcutContext::WidgetWithChildrenShortcut);
// added this comment to check does it work at list outside filedialog
// addAction(actionWithShortcut);
QFileDialog *fd = new QFileDialog(this);
fd->addAction(actionWithShortcut);
connect(actionWithShortcut, &QAction::triggered, fd, &QFileDialog::reject);
fd->show();
But looks like I can't add any actions to QFileDialog or they are somehow omitted. Any suggestions?
Already tried window flags, options and etc. Can't find any solutions.
By default, a QFileDialog is a thin wrapper around the native dialog. Qt didn't go to the lengths needed to wrap actions around the native dialog. So this is a case of a missing implementation. You could patch Qt to make it work on a platform of your choice, and contribute the change back, of course.
The action would presumably work if you were to switch to a non-native file dialog.
I have a coworker who needs to have multiple versions of LabVIEW on his computer. He has a bad habit of opening LV2010 code in LV2013. LabVIEW doesn't warn that you are about to change all of the code to a new version of LabVIEW, and this breaks the code running on a test system on the production floor.
Here is my question: does anyone know of any kind of hack or legitimate method of changing the windows title bar for a single application? I would like to be able to change the color of the title bar only on LabVIEW 2013 from blue to red or something.
If this isn't possible, does anyone have an idea of how to distinguish one application from another that looks almost identical?
Thanks for any advice you have to give.
Well, the good news is that LabVIEW 2014 on will have the version number in their icon. That doesn't help your situation much, though. I'm not sure about changing the title bar, but I think I can help with your second question.
The icons for those versions are indistinguishable, however, the mass compile LabVIEW does when you open a project from an older version is a dead giveaway. You know LabVIEW is performing a mass compile if, while the project is loading, "Compiling:" appears where "Loading:" normally does. Close out of LabVIEW without saving and open the right version of LabVIEW. If he still goofs, there's always reverting in whatever version control software you're (hopefully) using, and you can always save back to older versions in LabVIEW itself.
I currently have four (older) versions installed to support projects that are under warranty. One trick I've found to be helpful is to put a .txt document in the same directory I save my .lvproj with the LabVIEW version as the title. For example, if the code is written in LabVIEW 2012 I include a text document called LV2012.txt in my _Project folder. Not a foolproof plan, but it has definitely made me double check my open version of LabVIEW before double-clicking.
I would suggest to use get VI version property described here: http://digital.ni.com/public.nsf/allkb/0C72D335AA87DD6486256FC40069C17F
Than using version information change you title bar text or transparency(I am not sure about color) or other FP component using VI ref property node.
is it possible to render to Windows' desktop (to overwrite the wallpaper)?
It wouldn´t be Windows if this was not possible, so there must be a way.
One i found out is, to call "GetDC()" with 0. But this draws on the top -
so all windows are overwriten.
I just want to overwrite the background wallpaper.
Is it possible to render there with DirectX (should be possible if with GDI+)?
Any suggestions? :)
Thanks
R
It was possible before, MS killed the feature in Vista, and it no longer works.
AVS2 (visualization library in Winamp) used IDirectDrawSurface7::Blt with DDBLT_COLORFILL flag to present stuff to desktop, with some setup code before that.
Source code. What it did.
We have an application built against MFC9 (VC2008).
The application is an SDI application, and shows a file open dialog during InitInstance(). Showing that dialog causes comdlg32.dll to be loaded. Some minutes later, the comdlg32.dll is unloaded automatically. After this, the next function depending on the DLL will crash.
How can this be avoided? What governs the automatic unloading/loading of the DLL?
Further info:
We don't see this problem on WinXP with the same application.
On Win7, this behavior only occurred since the beginning of this year - maybe some MFC update is related to this?
A small test application does not exhibit the problematic behavior - the comdlg32.dll is re-loaded when needed.
We’ve found a statement by Microsoft that it isn’t recommended to use modal dialogs in InitInstance() of MDI applications (http://support.microsoft.com/kb/173261) - we have an SDI application, though.
We don't directly use comdlg32.dll in any way, only indirectly through the MFC.
You have to call InitCommonControlsEx in your application on startup.
This will initialize the comdlg32.dll and also increase the reference count of the dll, so it won't get unloaded after closing a file-open/save dialog.
You don't say whether you customize your dialog or it is just a straight up file dialog. I think starting with Vista, the common file dialog was changed some. I know if you compare older MFC code with newer, you will see that the MFC code has been changed to take advantage of those changes. For instance, the IFileDialogEvents and IFileDialogControlEvents were implemented in MFC to support the way Vista and later versions of the OS customize file dialogs.
I don't know if I have an answer, but just for grins I would probably make sure I call AfxOleInitialize() sometime in InitInstance() before I tried to call the file dialog.
The other thing I would try for sure (since it works under XP) would be in the constructor of your CFileDialog would be to make sure to set bVistaStyle to FALSE. This ensures m_bVistaStyle is set to FALSE which it is set at when running under XP.
I have an MFC application that uses an ancient (circa 1999) third-party ActiveX control.
Since upgrading the project from VS2008 to VS2010, I'm having problems...
In the OnSize handler of the parent dialog IsWindow always returns false for the handle returned by control.GetSafeHwnd(), even when GetSafeHwnd() returns a non-NULL value. The rest of the control's parent dialog is displayed fine, but it doesn't seem to respond to any input.
I've seen this article, but GetSafeHwnd() isn't returning NULL in this case (after the first time that it is called, which is before the control is instantiated).
The control does cause the trace message "Control wants to be windowless" to be output when it's loaded. However it also does this when compiled in VS2008, so this may be a red herring. Searching for this message points me to creating a class derived from COleControlSite, and denying the control windowless-ness, but it seems there are no good example of this available, and as I say, it's not clear that this is really the cause of the problem.
I've also found this issue mentioned on MSDN's VS2010 porting page:
"An ActiveX control compiled by using Visual C++ 6.0, when embedded in
a dialog box in a project developed by using Visual C++ 2010, may
cause your program to assert at run time. In this situation, open the
ATL or MFC project associated with the ActiveX control in Visual C++
2010, and recompile it.. The assert will be in the file occcont.cpp,
on this line in source: ASSERT(IsWindow(pTemp->m_hWnd))."
I assume that there's something about VS6-compiled ActiveX controls that causes the window handles to be treated as invalid by the current Win32 implementation of IsWindow. The suggested solution is of course unhelpful as it's a third-party control, and we can't recompile it.
Has anyone managed to get around this?
I've already found solutions for VS2010 projects not running on Windows 2000, and errors linking to ODBC, but don't seem to be able to find anything on this one.
Thanks,
Chris
I didn't find a solution to this in the end - upgraded the controls to a VS2010-compatible version.
For what it's worth: if you don't care whether the control will appear transparent or not, you may force the control to have a window anyway - even though it can operate without a window.
You see, the ActiveX control must first ask the container (the window which will host the control) if it's okay to be activated without a window. This is simply because not all containers support windowless activation.
If this interface (IOleInPlaceSiteWindowless) returns okay then it proceeds with this special windowless activation, if not a window will be created for the control as normal.
Disclaimer:
I don't know if this 'unnecessary' window will make the assertion failure go away. In other words: I don't know if the window handle is passed down 'deep' enough into the AX control.
More about the IOleInPlaceSiteWindowless interface:
https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ms682300(v=vs.85).aspx