On Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 11:34:11AM +0200, Piotr Caban wrote:
Signed-off-by: Piotr Caban piotr@codeweavers.com
This patch also fixes control behavior when ECO_NOHIDESEL is not specified and the control looses focus (for bug 40915).
dlls/riched20/editor.c | 9 +++++++-- dlls/riched20/paint.c | 6 ++++-- 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/dlls/riched20/editor.c b/dlls/riched20/editor.c index 13a2857..b7864eb 100644 --- a/dlls/riched20/editor.c +++ b/dlls/riched20/editor.c @@ -3453,14 +3453,15 @@ LRESULT ME_HandleMessage(ME_TextEditor *editor, UINT msg, WPARAM wParam, ME_RewrapRepaint(editor); }
if ((changedSettings & settings & ECO_NOHIDESEL) && !editor->bHaveFocus)
ME_InvalidateSelection( editor );
if (changedSettings & settings & ECO_VERTICAL) FIXME("ECO_VERTICAL not implemented yet!\n"); if (changedSettings & settings & ECO_AUTOHSCROLL) FIXME("ECO_AUTOHSCROLL not implemented yet!\n"); if (changedSettings & settings & ECO_AUTOVSCROLL) FIXME("ECO_AUTOVSCROLL not implemented yet!\n");
if (changedSettings & settings & ECO_NOHIDESEL)
FIXME("ECO_NOHIDESEL not implemented yet!\n"); if (changedSettings & settings & ECO_WANTRETURN) FIXME("ECO_WANTRETURN not implemented yet!\n"); if (changedSettings & settings & ECO_AUTOWORDSELECTION)
@@ -4257,6 +4258,8 @@ LRESULT ME_HandleMessage(ME_TextEditor *editor, UINT msg, WPARAM wParam, editor->bHaveFocus = TRUE; ME_ShowCaret(editor); ME_SendOldNotify(editor, EN_SETFOCUS);
- if (!editor->bHideSelection && !(editor->styleFlags & ECO_NOHIDESEL))
I think this, and all subsequent ECO_NOHIDESELs, would be better as ES_NOHIDESEL. The first one is fine as ECO_NOHIDESEL, since that's the setting one.
Huw.
On 07/08/16 12:11, Huw Davies wrote:
I think this, and all subsequent ECO_NOHIDESELs, would be better as ES_NOHIDESEL. The first one is fine as ECO_NOHIDESEL, since that's the setting one.
I've sent a fixed version. I'm not sure if I have changed it as you wanted.
Thanks, Piotr
On 07/08/16 12:29, Piotr Caban wrote:
On 07/08/16 12:11, Huw Davies wrote:
I think this, and all subsequent ECO_NOHIDESELs, would be better as ES_NOHIDESEL. The first one is fine as ECO_NOHIDESEL, since that's the setting one.
I've sent a fixed version. I'm not sure if I have changed it as you wanted.
I guess v3 is what you were asking about.
Thanks, Piotr
On Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 12:33:41PM +0200, Piotr Caban wrote:
On 07/08/16 12:29, Piotr Caban wrote:
On 07/08/16 12:11, Huw Davies wrote:
I think this, and all subsequent ECO_NOHIDESELs, would be better as ES_NOHIDESEL. The first one is fine as ECO_NOHIDESEL, since that's the setting one.
I've sent a fixed version. I'm not sure if I have changed it as you wanted.
I guess v3 is what you were asking about.
It was, but let's go with v2, on reflection it's a bit less confusing.
Huw.