Related to my question here, is it possible to create a window hook that will monitor if an application has been opened or not?
Most that I have found about hooks seem to focus on user input (keyboard press, mouse events), but I could not confirm if it is possible to know that the "double click" the user made is to open an application, or just to highlight a word.
Thank you.
Indeed, window hooks would not be sufficient. In fact for the task you are asking about you could use various strategies, such as:
enumerating the processes to find the one you're looking for (Tool Help API or PSAPI)
enumerating the top-level windows on the desktop (but you're limited to your desktop then)
check for a global or local event, mutex (or other kernel object) to deduce from that that some instance of the application is running
... or even from kernel PsSetCreateProcessNotifyRoutine
probably there are variations on the above plus some more.
In essence the question is whether you want to check for the process or for some other indicator that signifies whether the program you want to check for has been started.
Related
The documentation for CGWindowListCopyWindowInfo says
Generating the dictionaries for system windows is a relatively expensive operation. As always, you should profile your code and adjust your usage of this function appropriately for your needs.
My question is how can I "adjust" my use of this function? For a code automation process I frequently need to check what window is frontmost among those of document or modal level. That is, I call CGWindowListCopyWindowInfo, ignore the windows that belong to other processes or have levels that I don't care about, and identify the first window that remains.
If there were a way to ask for information about just the windows owned by my process, say, that would be nice, but I see no way to do that. Or if there were a way to be notified when my windows change. I could watch for Carbon Events when windows are hidden or shown, but of course that is a deprecated technology.
You can use [NSWindow windowNumbersWithOptions:0] to get the window numbers of just the current application's windows (on the active space) in z-order.
I'm a developer and a long-time Windows user with an obsession about making my system as convenient to use as possible.
Yesterday I thought about something that has always annoyed me in Windows and that I've taken for granted, and I realized that I have a better idea for how it could work, and I'm now wondering whether it's possible to tweak Windows to work like that.
The thing that annoys me is when windows steal focus. For example, I could be running an installer for some program. While it's working, I'll switch to my browser and browse, maybe entering some text into an email in my browser. Then suddenly the installer finishes and its window steals the focus. Now I'm in the middle of writing an email, so I might press a key that happens to be bound to a button on that installer, and then that button gets invoked, doing some action that I never intended to happen!
This is doubly annoying to me because I'm using a multiple-desktop program called DexPot, and when a window steals focus, it also brings itself to the desktop I'm currently on, which can be really annoying, because then I have to put it back into its original desktop.
How my ideal solution to this problem would work: Every time a window tries to steal focus, we intercept that, and don't let it. We show something like a toaster message saying "Foobar installer wants focus, press Win-Whatever to switch to it". If and when you press the key combo, it switches to the window.
The question is: Is there an easy way to tweak Windows to make this happen? I know very little about Windows programming. I do know AHK and if it's possible with that, that'd be great.
No, there isn't an easy way to add this behavior, but Windows tries to do this automatically.
In theory apps shouldn't be able to steal the foreground while you're actively using another app. Unfortunatly there are some scenarios where Windows can't tell the difference between legitimate user actions that should change the foreground and unwanted foreground-theft. The window manager generally tightens up the holes a bit with each new version of Windows, but also needs to make sure that apps can come to the foreground when the user wants them to, even if that desire is expressed indirectly.
For example, a process launched by the current foreground process can put a window into the foreground. This is necessary so that when a user launches a window from Explorer the newly launched process can open its main window. This permission only lasts until the next user input, so if an application is slow to launch and you start working on an email the app may lose its foreground permissions before it can use them.
See the SetForegroundWindow function documentation for a list of requirements for a process to be able to set a window into the foreground.
There are also apps which specifically make use of these requirements to steal the permission (by joining the foreground queue or synthsising user input to themselves), but I suspect in your installer scenario it is accidental.
I'm not sure what exactly is going on, but I suspect that the problem comes from the installer running as a service and accidentally stealing the foreground permission when it tries to launch the app on your current desktop.
It would be theoretically possible for an external process to hook into the foreground system to override this and show your confirmation toast, but it would be tricky to get right and would require significant low level code (I'd probably start with a CbtHook). It would not be possible in a scripting package like AHK (assuming you mean AutoHotKey) but would need to be native C/C++ code injected into every running process.
I am not sure how to ask the question so here is a picture of some idea that came to mind
So for example, when you run my "custom launcher" it displays a window with a couple buttons on the side which you can assign values to. When you click on a button, the appropriate program will run in the big panel on the right (in window mode).
This is all from the user's perspective of course. They will just see that the program they want to run appears in that panel. The actual implementation may have nothing to do with "one program running inside another program"
My own use case is limited to windows desktop platforms only, but if it is possible to generalize it that would be nice as well.
Is this actually possible? Can I write such a program that will run another program inside a panel? The program that's launched may be someone else's, such as MS paint or calculator.
Just to expand on my comment above, here is an approach that may work for you: Fake it :)
When you launch the program, intercept all windows messages to the program that control it's position on screen. That way it 'appears' to be fixed in place, but in reality it's still attached to the normal Windows desktop.
Here's some light reading for you:
Windows Event Hooks
A hook is a mechanism by which an application can intercept events,
such as messages, mouse actions, and keystrokes. A function that
intercepts a particular type of event is known as a hook procedure. A
hook procedure can act on each event it receives, and then modify or
discard the event.
I would recommend against it in a commercial application because you are modifying the behavior of software you don't own - that software may make assumptions about what its parent window is, but for experimentation there's the SetParent Win32 function.
I have been working on windows automation and monitoring.
What exactly happens when I lock the screen of a windows machine?
I am working with Windows 7 at the moment, are there big differences to the behavior if I switch to Vista or the server versions?
Is there still a desktop that can be accessed via api's?
I know that i can still send key strokes and mouse clicks to specific windows (via ControlSend and ControlClick), but there seems to be no "desktop" itself.
Could someone shed some light on this whole thing or point me at a readable source where I could get an overview over the topic?
Basically what happens is that Windows switches to the secure desktop, makes it the current one, so input is now associated with it.
The old desktop remains where it was: all the HWNDs on the desktop are still there, and any thread attached to that desktop can still access those HWNDs, get their location, and so on. You can still send messages to windows on this desktop, so long as the thread sending the message is also on that desktop.
However, since the desktop is now inactive, it cannot receive input. GetForegroundWindow will return NULL (IIRC), and you can't use SendInput any longer, since input now belongs to [a thread on] a different desktop; no controls on that inactive desktop can receive focus.
Note that sending keypress messages to a control that doesn't have focus can sometimes cause unexpected behavior, since the app or control generally never expects to receive keyboard input without getting the focus first. (This can be problematic for controls that set up some sort of input context in WM_SETFOCUS and clear it up in WM_KILLFOCUS, for example.)
In short, the UI is still there: you can do certain queries against it, but you can no longer automate it as you could on a regular desktop by sending input, and some other functions that relate to focus or input may fail.
I'm not super familiar with AutoHotKey, but the name and description of functionality suggests that it's heavily reliant on the underlying Win32 SendInput API. This won't work at all for keyboard input when a desktop is inactive.
For a reasonable overview of how desktops work and how they relate to winstations, the locked desktop, and so on, check out the Desktop article on MSDN.
One issue that I've run into in the past with desktops and automation is: how to I leave a long-running test that's using some form of user input automation (mouse, keyboard simulation), but still lock my PC so that someone can't just walk by and interfere with it. Once you lock the PC, the desktop is inactive, and so the automation stops working. A similar issue happens if the screensaver kicks in: the desktop switches, and the automation fails.
One solution is to use two PCs: let's call them Main and Test: from Main, open a remote terminal services client onto the Test machine, and then run the automated test on the test machine, but from a terminal services client window on the Main machine. Now the cool part: you can minimize that TSC window, or even lock the Main machine (or let the screensaver kick in), and that virtual session will continue working, thinking that it is still active - it's just that nobody is paying it any attention. This is one way to create a "connected" session with an active desktop, but one that no-one can interfere with, because it's protected behind the locked desktop of the Main machine.
I don't know the details, but I believe the lock screen constitutes a separate "desktop" and maybe also a separate "window station" (as I understand it a window station is merely a container for desktops). The MSDN section on window stations should hopefully be useful: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ms687098%28v=vs.85%29.aspx
In order to access a desktop, you will need to use the regular windows api's from a thread that is on that desktop. SetThreadDesktop would probably be the easiest way to do that in C, as long as the desktop isn't on a different window station.
Unfortunately, this is already difficult for a regular privileged application, and using AutoHotkey complicates it even more. Since you don't have control over threads or over process initialization, you will probably have to create a new process in the other desktop (you can do this using the CreateProcess API, which appears to have a wrapper available for AHK to which you can supply a desktop name: http://www.autohotkey.com/forum/topic1952.html). Your process will need special privileges to do this; I'm not sure that even running as Administrator is enough.
Using the Apple OS X Cocoa framework, how can I post a sheet (slide-down modal dialog) on the window of another process?
Edit: Clarified a bit:
My application is a Finder extension to do Subversion version control (http://scplugin.tigris.org/). Part of my application is a plug-in (a Contextual Menu Item for Finder); the bulk of my application, however, is in a separate daemon proces. For several reasons, we've chosen to put virtually all the code into the daemon; the plug-in only defines the menu itself, and Apple-Events over to the Daemon.
Sometimes, the daemon needs to prompt the user for further information. It can toss a window on-screen for this, but that's disruptive (randomly positioned), and it seems to me the work flow here is legitimately modal, for example "select a file, pick 'commit' from the menu, provide commit comments, do the operation."
Interprocess cooperation (such as passing a reference of some kind) is acceptable: both processes are mine, but I want to avoid binding the sheet's code into the primary process.
Really, it sounds like you're trying to have your inter-process communication happen at the view level, which isn't really how Cocoa generally works. Things will be much easier if you separate your layers a bit more than that.
Why don't you want to put the sheet code into the other process? It's view code, and view code is inherently process-specific. The right thing to do here is probably to add somewhat generic modal-sheet support to your plugin code, and an IPC call that your daemon can make to summon that code. Trying to ship view objects over to the remote process is going to be nightmarish if you can make it work at all.
You're fighting the frameworks with this approach.
You can't add a sheet to a window in another process, because you have at most only the most restricted access to the windows in the other process.
Please don't do this. Make the interaction nonmodal if at all possible. Especially in something like a commit, it's much nicer to be able to browse around your files while you're writing commit comments.
OS X does have window groups, but I don't think they can (easily) span applications.
Another thing to consider is that in OS X it's possible to have many Finder windows open on the same folder (unlike in OS 9). Even if you did have sufficient privileges/APIs to add a sheet to a Finder window, it's not like the modality of that window would prevent the user from being able to continue working with the files.
(My personal opinion as a long-time Mac user is that this kind of interaction would drive me right up the wall.)