"Vincent Povirk" madewokherd+8cd9@gmail.com wrote:
That's not hard to implement this properly using monitor info.
Implement what?
Linux doesn't have any concept of this "taskbar" thing.
Vincent Povirk
On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 10:36 PM, Dmitry Timoshkov dmitry@codeweavers.com wrote:
"Vincent Povirk" madewokherd+8cd9@gmail.com wrote:
That's not hard to implement this properly using monitor info.
-- Dmitry.
"Vincent Povirk" madewokherd+8cd9@gmail.com wrote:
Implement what?
Linux doesn't have any concept of this "taskbar" thing.
(Please bottom post).
You can make a good guess where taskbar(s) present using monitor info.
I'll assume you mean something like this:
1. Look for a difference between the workarea bottom and the screen bottom. If there is one, assume the taskbar is there. 2. Check the other sides similarly. 3. If workarea == screen rect, lie.
That will often be wrong, and there's no clear benefit to doing that over lieing consistently. The one program I know of that relies on ABM_GETTASKBARPOS, rapid uploader, apparently worked fine when it was an alias of GetWindowRect (which is completely braindead). I cannot think of any legitimate use for the information returned by this api.
Vincent Povirk
"Vincent Povirk" madewokherd+8cd9@gmail.com wrote:
I'll assume you mean something like this:
- Look for a difference between the workarea bottom and the screen
bottom. If there is one, assume the taskbar is there. 2. Check the other sides similarly.
Yes, I ment something like that.
- If workarea == screen rect, lie.
No, report that there is no a taskbar.
That will often be wrong, and there's no clear benefit to doing that over lieing consistently. The one program I know of that relies on ABM_GETTASKBARPOS, rapid uploader, apparently worked fine when it was an alias of GetWindowRect (which is completely braindead). I cannot think of any legitimate use for the information returned by this api.
Then there is no point in sending such an "improvement".
- If workarea == screen rect, lie.
No, report that there is no a taskbar.
There's no clean way to do that.
The MSDN documentation for ABM_GETTASKBARPOS says that it returns a bounding rectangle for the taskbar and a boolean. MSDN gives no indication of what the boolean result means, but under normal circumstances it is TRUE.
This is the "old" implementation: http://source.winehq.org/source/dlls/shell32/shell32_main.c?v=wine-1.0.1#L88...
In general, the old implementation had no correlation to what the function was actually meant to do, so I replaced it with stubs before doing a proper implementation. Now ABM_GETTASKBARPOS always returns FALSE: http://source.winehq.org/source/programs/explorer/appbar.c#L196
Does returning FALSE mean there's no taskbar? I have no idea. I can think of only a few reasons the taskbar might be missing from Windows machine that has an SHAppBarMessage implementation: * explorer.exe is not running. * You're using Windows NT 3.51. (MSDN isn't entirely consistent on the question of whether SHAppBarMessage exists there, but I don't think it had a taskbar.) * You're using a shell replacement. (I don't know how those work.)
It's perfectly reasonable for developers to write programs that function in none of those circumstances for current versions of Windows. Effectively, reporting that there is no taskbar could be a serious error.
That will often be wrong, and there's no clear benefit to doing that over lieing consistently. The one program I know of that relies on ABM_GETTASKBARPOS, rapid uploader, apparently worked fine when it was an alias of GetWindowRect (which is completely braindead). I cannot think of any legitimate use for the information returned by this api.
Then there is no point in sending such an "improvement".
There is. It will make rapid uploader work again.
"Vincent Povirk" madewokherd+8cd9@gmail.com wrote:
Does returning FALSE mean there's no taskbar? I have no idea. I can think of only a few reasons the taskbar might be missing from Windows machine that has an SHAppBarMessage implementation:
- explorer.exe is not running.
- You're using Windows NT 3.51. (MSDN isn't entirely consistent on the
question of whether SHAppBarMessage exists there, but I don't think it had a taskbar.)
- You're using a shell replacement. (I don't know how those work.)
You know, there is the only one way to figure it out: write a test case.
You know, there is the only one way to figure it out: write a test case.
That's not the answer to everything, you know.
If I have a windows machine that does not have a taskbar, I can call SHAppBarMessage to see how I should report this to the app. But how do I get a windows machine without a taskbar?
On Sun, Dec 7, 2008 at 11:50 PM, Vincent Povirk madewokherd+8cd9@gmail.com wrote:
You know, there is the only one way to figure it out: write a test case.
That's not the answer to everything, you know.
If I have a windows machine that does not have a taskbar, I can call SHAppBarMessage to see how I should report this to the app. But how do I get a windows machine without a taskbar?
In, at least, the wine community, we have images of most known versions of windows. And like you said, you can also figure out how to replace the shell as an alternative.
This doesn't have to be so hard.
As far as I know, all any real application needs here is a stub. The stub has to claim success, but the values it gives do not have to be meaningful. If a real implementation were trivial, I would go ahead and write one anyway. It isn't so I won't.
I'm not going to find some magical "success, but there isn't a taskbar" value I can return by testing old operating systems and shell replacements. The API is defined by developer expectations, when they happen to be matched by what Windows does. Developers expect, and get, a system that always has a taskbar.
If a real application actually needs to know where the taskbar is, I'll take another look at this. Until then, I say we return something plausible and wrong, as that keeps programs happy.
Vincent Povirk
-
Dmitry Timoshkov -
James Hawkins -
Vincent Povirk