It is a bit odd to have different default values for the vertical
and horizontal policy, but then that's what we almost always want in
practice: Automatic scrolling vertically, and no scrolling horizontally.
Part-of: <https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/-/merge_requests/3020>
The scroll fade effect is the only component that accesses the
{v,h}scroll properties for anything other than getting access
to the corresponding adjustments.
Allow the effect to get what it needs via new private API instead,
so we can deprecate and eventually remove the scroll bar properties.
Part-of: <https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/-/merge_requests/3020>
The adjustments are currently only accessible indirectly via
the scroll bars. It is a bit odd to expose internal children,
and as nearly all users only access them for the adjustments,
it makes sense to expose those instead.
Part-of: <https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/-/merge_requests/3020>
We hide scrollbars with POLICY_AUTOMATIC when the content of the scroll
view fits completely inside the view without having to scroll. In this case
it seems like a good idea to give the content the full available size
without subtracting scroll bars from that size.
So subtract the scroll bar from the size we give to the child only when
the scroll bar is actually visible, when it's invisible subtract 0 instead.
Part-of: <https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/-/merge_requests/2190>
StScrollView applies the policy of whether to show or hide the scroll
bar,
and with the AUTOMATIC policy the scroll bar should be hidden as soon as
the
content of the scroll view is small enough to fit without scrolling.
Now we only know about the final size of the content when we're inside
st_scroll_view_allocate(), so that's where we can decide whether the
scroll
bar should be visible or not. Clutter really doesn't like calling
clutter_actor_show/hide() in the middle of an allocation cycle though,
so
what we do instead is saving the state into priv->vscrollbar_visible,
and
then just not painting the scroll bar based on that in a paint() vfunc
override.
This approach is not great for several reasons, it means we also have to
override pick() and finally it means the paint volume of the scroll bar
is
incorrect.
While the greatest solution to this would be to just hide/show the
scroll
bar inside the allocate() function as it is possible in gtk, we have an
established pattern for this kind of case too: We usually allocate a
0-sized
rect for the thing we want to hide, so let's do that instead.
A nice side effect is that we can conveniently drop another paint() and
pick() vfunc override.
Part-of: <https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/-/merge_requests/2190>
Storing the pointer to the fade effect only works as long as we control
all the code that can modify the effects of an actor, but this is not
the case in the presence of extensions. Apparently some extension
manages to remove the effect, which leads to fade_effect pointing to
some invalid address by the time dispose is called, leading to a crash.
This instead uses clutter_actor_get_effect() to get the effect when it
is needed to avoid crashing in these situations.
Closes: https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/-/issues/6521
Part-of: <https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/-/merge_requests/2974>
ClutterEffects are responsible for queueing redraws when their
properties change (and StScrollViewFade is a good citizen already), also
Clutter itself should queue a redraw when adding/removing an effect.
Users of Clutter should never have to queue redraws themselves (unless
they're implementing a custom ClutterEffect or ClutterContent), so don't
queue a redraw here.
Part-of: <https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/-/merge_requests/2189>
The fade effect can also be added to the scroll view programatically
instead of using CSS via the st_scroll_view_update_fade_effect() API.
We make use of this API in the appDisplay, but since commit ba547ec1d
the fade margins get overridden to 0.0 from the ::style-changed handler.
Fix this by only setting the fade margins when CSS actually defines a
custom vfade/hfade offset.
Related: https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/-/issues/5079
Part-of: <https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/-/merge_requests/2189>
We are now consistently calling notify() when a property does change.
With that we can opt out of g_object_set()'s implicit change notifications,
so that notify is only emitted when a property *actually* changes.
Part-of: <https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/-/merge_requests/2168>
Since we correctly call the `style_changed` vfunc superclass at the end
of our own function anyway, the style changes will get propagated to the
children of the scrollView inside `st_widget_real_style_changed` anyway.
So remove those unneeded and quite expensive (because they cause the
theme node to be regenerated) calls to `st_widget_style_changed`.
Part-of: <https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/-/merge_requests/953>
This will be needed for fine tuning of the visible area for appGrid
navigation purposes. We most nominally can let it happen via CSS as
the size calculations happen on size allocate, so we want to avoid
triggering relayouts while adapting to the given size.
Part-of: <https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/-/merge_requests/1630>
Instead of taking just vertical/horizontal offsets, take a ClutterMargin
to allow us set the fade offsets on each direction specifically. Also,
handle negative values in margins, the fade effect will run in the negative
space left by the scrollview padding instead. Another difference now is
that areas outside the extents of the effect will be transparent, instead
of the effect ending abruptly past the given extents.
This will be used by the app grid, in order to selectively let see either
of next/prev pages while navigating.
While at it, fix code style issues in st_scroll_view_update_fade_effect(),
and clean up unused variables from the GLSL code.
Part-of: <https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/-/merge_requests/1630>
Much of St is undocumented, aside from input/output arguments. This is
no doubt because a lot of it parallels Gtk closely, but is worth
improving since many new programmers are not familiar with Gtk.
closes https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/-/issues/2983
While still leaving them unused, pass around ClutterPaintContext and
ClutterPickContext when painting and picking.
The reason for splitting this change up in two is to make it possible to
bisect easier in between the API change and the change to using the
framebuffer passed around with the temporary contexts.
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/merge_requests/827
`g_object_notify()` actually takes a global lock to look up the property
by its name, which means there is a performance hit (albeit tiny) every
time this function is called. For this reason, always try to use
`g_object_notify_by_pspec()` instead.
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/merge_requests/652
In `st`, we can do this by using `ST_PARAM_*`. In the other code files,
just use `G_PARAM_STATIC_STRINGS` directly.
This is just a minor convenience to prevent a few unnecessary string
copies.
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/merge_requests/646
In order to replace GTK+'s GtkPolicyType. It's bit-compatible with it, too.
All callers have been updated to use it.
This is a purely accessory change in terms of X11 Display usage cleanup,
but helps see better what is left.
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-shell/merge_requests/317
And constrain it in StScrollView instead (instead of falling back to an
infinite paint volume, as the actor as paint/pick impls, but no
corresponding get_paint_volume one).
Fixes artifacts with the AppView (and possibly other places) when paint
volumes are aggressively cached.
GTK+ added a new PolicyType which currently triggers compiler warnings
about unhandled values in switch statements. We also have a use case for
it already, so add support for the new policy type.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=739379
Commit cfecd063c9ca3d18cd changed the allocation logic to not allocate
scrollbars when the *_visible booleans are false. This breaks the
fade effect as well as the NEVER policy. We do not paint scrollbars
when they are not supposed to be visible, so not allocating them
and thus leaving them in a "needs allocation" state just causes problems.
I am not convinced that it solved any problem to begin with (we don't paint
them anyway).
As the previous condition has basically always been true, just do it
unconditionally.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=705664
We don't set :visible on the scrollbars, but use booleans to track
if they are visible. Thus check the booleans instead of the actor's
properties when allocating the scrollbars.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=704265
If enabled, scrollbars take away from the allocation given to the
view's content. This is usually preferrable to painting the bars on
top of the content, but there are exceptions, for instance when the
content needs to be centered with regard to the view as a whole.
Add a :overlay-scrollbars property to account for those cases.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=694261
The code here before was added as dummy code to satisfy an error
in the missing switch, and wasn't ever tested due to the lack of XI2
in mutter. Use the same math as GtkRange does to calculate scroll bar
positions from raw XI2 deltas to allow for proper smooth scrolling.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=687573
Currently the scroll event code only handles scroll events if the
adjustment's value is within the "lower" and "upper" limits. The
likely intent was to pass events to a parent scroll view when
reaching the bounds (uh, nested scroll views!), but apparently
we never made use of this, as the upper bound is actually wrong
(an adjustment's maximum value is upper - page_size, not upper).
Just handle all scroll events unconditionally and rely on the
bound checks in StAdjustment.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=672413
