Clarify that we zero out the widget coords and only keep its dimensions.
If we have no widget to fall-back to, memset to 0 the output @rect since
we return FALSE whether or not we have widget, so protect users from not
knowing if there was a widget and possibly accessing uninitialised ints.
Fixes https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gtk/-/issues/893#note_1766079
When a Gtk.Popover loses the focus, it blocks the grab_notify
signal from the associated widget, and it unblocks it when it
regains the focus. To know whether the signal is or not blocked,
it uses the priv->grab_notify_blocked flag.
On the other hand, when the method update_relative_to() is
called, all the signals connected to the old associated widget
are disconnected, and connected to the new widget.
Unfortunately, the priv->grab_notify_blocked flag isn't updated,
which means that if update_relative_to() is called while the
Gtk.Popover doesn't have the focus (for example, because the
user switched into another application), when the focus is
regained, the code in window_focus_in() will see that
priv->grab_notify_blocked is TRUE and will unblock the handler;
but that handler wasn't blocked because the one that was blocked
was disconnected when update_relative_to() was called. This
shows a WARNING in the console:
GLib-GObject-WARNING **: ../../../gobject/gsignal.c:2692: handler '5146' of instance '0x556912f84f40' is not blocked
This patch fixes this.
Fix https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gtk/-/issues/4777
because otherwise this second[1] popover will not be
able to save the filechooser default widget (the 'save'
button) because the first popover has not yet restablish
it (as will be done on popover's unmap handler).
[1] second because 'Rename' popover is launched from inside
the 'file properties' popover.
Fixes#2555
Fix popovers to properly gain focus when clicked
inside an unfocused window.
We use the GTK_PHASE_CAPTURE of the 'pressed' event
to early detect that the popover is being clicked
inside an inactive window, this allow us to present
the window (and be focused) before the normal signal
handlers for the popover click/pressed events are run
which would ultimately give focus to popover widget.
This fix works for both modal and 'non modal' popovers
when being clicked inside unfocused windows.
Fixes issue #1871
This is better than nothing at all. The wording is taken from Carlos's
commit message when he added this shortly before 3.12, so add Since too.
Skip the bit from his commit message explaining what this replaced; we
don't need to say all the less good things our convenience API replaces.
.update_position() enforces that non-Wayland platforms must position a
Popover within its parent Window. We use the allocation of the Window
to translate the position and check for overshoot on each of its sides.
Calling Widget.get_allocation() of a CSD Window includes its shadows.
But shadows were not excluded from the area in which we can position.
Thus, Popovers could get positioned in the shadow of CSD windows, where,
at least on X11, no input is received. Therefore, positioning a Popover
over a shadow meant its child widgets within that area became unusable.
Fix by calling Window.get_shadow() and including it in the overshoot on
each side. This adjusts for how the allocation includes shadows, making
overshoots with and without shadows the same. Thus, we avoid considering
shadows as viable for positioning, favouring a side where input works.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=786209
When the popover is dismissed, we return the focus to
where it came from. However, by using gtk_widget_grab_focus,
we were messing up the selection if that widget happens to
be an entry. Special-case GtkEntry and use
gtk_entry_grab_focus_without_selecting to avoid this issue.
Creating with `gtk_popover_new_from_model` should be exactly the same as
if via `gtk_popover_new` plus `gtk_popover_bind_model`.
Also remove the style if the model is unbound at any point.
The relative-to widget may be reparented itself into/out of a
scrollable. In this cases make the hierachy-changed handler to
unset the parent scrollable when unparented, and look up again
the parent scrollable after it's reparented.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=771812
gtk_popover_set_scrollable_full() takes care of the signal connected
on the scrollable itself, in addition to the adjustment signals the
popover listens to.
gtk_popover_update_scrollable() looks up the current relative-to
widget hierarchy and updates the current scrollable.
The places where the scrollable is being maintained have been updated
to use these functions.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=771812
Since we're using _get_rect_coords in size-allocate when allocating the
size of the child widget, use the newly introduced _get_rect_for_size to
calculate the difference between the passed size_for and the one we're
supposed to pass on to the child widget.
When calculating the requested size of a popover, we need to do the
exact same same thing _get_rect_coords did, but not for the
current popopver allocation. Add _get_rect_for_size that can be used for
this purpose
The effect of transitions-enabled=true can now be
achieved using gtk_popover_popup/popdown and the effect
of transitions-enabled=false can be achieved using
gtk_widget_show/hide.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=769706
Since not chaining up in gtk_widget_show/gtk_widget_hide is not allowed,
we can't just implicitly delay the hiding in GtkPopover's hide
implementation. Fix this by introducing gtk_popover_popup() and
gtk_popover_popdown() to show or hide a popover with transition and
revert GtkPopover's show/hide implementation to apply their effect
without the transition.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=769706
If there are widget margins set, the whole popover will be displaced.
However the calculation of the tail position doesn't have this into
account, ending up with the tail being detached from the popover if
the margin grew too big.
We should not render the arrows invariably next to the GdkWindow edge,
but optionally displaced inside it depending on the widget margins.
Fixes the gtk3-demo "Popovers" demo case, whose GtkEntry popovers set
widget margins for some reason.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=767851
Commit a01fe14 changed the behaviour of popovers when the focus leaves
them to stop child popovers being hidden when the focus leaves their
parent. However they are now a bit too reluctant to hide - if the
focus passes to an unrelated popover the first popover is not
hidden. Also if the focus passes to another widget that does not
perform a gtk grab then the popover isn't hidden until the user
presses a non-movement key or clicks outside the popover.
The solution is to go back to checking if the focused widget is a
descendant of the popover, but to include popovers and their related
widgets in the ancestry chain.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=765595
If the popover's relative-to widget is unparented/reparented, we end
up unparenting/reparenting the popover as well. In that case, at the
moment of reparenting, the widget might have been visible (and is
thus mapped again), but priv->window hasn't been set yet.
We must first set priv->window, and then call gtk_window_add_popover(),
that way gtk_popover_map() has its prerequisites straight.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=766323
If the background is transparent, we can't use it for the input shape,
since that will be empty. Draw a box with rounded corners irectly
instead, in fully opaque black.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=759905
Otherwise the gtk_grab_remove() calls on widget destruction will happen
on the default window group, which may leave the real window group
of the popover with a dangling pointer if it is not the default one.
This could be seen on the inspector, open a popover in the properties
list and close the window with alt-F4.
Under X11, popovers are always constrained to the toplevel
window. Under Wayland, they aren't. This commit adds a
property that allows to explicitly constrain popovers to
the toplevel, giving them the same behavior under Wayland
as under X11.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=757474
