Our gnome-shell tweener integration has had hooks to determine when
the tweens have started and completed... except that they had a bug
in them. When a tween completed, it queued an idle handler to run
the callback in. If no tweens were running when the idle was removing,
it reset the tween state that contained the idle handler ID. It also
returned false, meaning that the source would always get removed.
If the actor had a tween in-flight when the idle was fired, it wouldn't
clean up after itself. While this is also a simple bug fix, remove the
callback so we don't queue unnecessary, unused idles.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=711732
Removing an existing source before scheduling a new one is not wrong,
but slightly less effective than doing nothing and relying on the
previously created source to do the job.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=711555
As the handler returns false, the corresponding source is removed
automatically and its id invalidated. Reset the id to 0 to reflect
this, otherwise newer versions of GLib will print a warning when
we later try to remove it explicitly.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=711555
There's a potential race condition in the search code: if we have an
outstanding search call to a provider for search "A", and if before it comes
back we do a subsearch for "AB", we won't have any results to pass along.
Previously, we used an empty list when storing the provider results, so we
effectively told the remote search app to filter through this empty list for
any search results that meet the new query, meaning we showed the user 0
results for the provider in this case.
Now that we don't store an empty list, but instead store `undefined`, this race
raises a warning. Solve it by doing an initial search query in this case
instead.
The search code isn't too smart about chained subsearches: now, if we hit this
race while already on a subsearch, we'll do an initial search for the subsearch
query instead, but that is much better than showing the user nothing. This
could be fixed in the future for a performance improvement.
Reviewed-by: Florian Müllner <fmuellner@gnome.org>
When a notification becomes expanded, it's either already shown,
or in the process of being shown. Don't set the state to SHOWING
again, which confuses our state machine.
The asynchronous nature of extension loading, session loading, and more,
makes the code racy as to what is initialized first, and hard to debug.
Additionally, since gjs is single-threaded, the only code we're running
in a thread anyway is readdir, which is going to be I/O bound, so the
code here is actually likely to be faster.
Drop this in favor of some good old fashioned synchronous loading.
We currently only ensure that width and height are positive, so it
is still possible to pass in values that don't make any sense at all
(which may even result in a crash when exceeding limits imposed by
X11).
There is nothing to screenshot outside the actual screen area, so
restrict the parameters to that.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=699752
We want to move away from gnome-menus eventually, so the simple
utility method isn't really worth keeping around. Reimplement it
in the one place that uses it.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=698486
Long ago, the search system worked in a synchronous manner: providers
were given a query, and results were collected in a single array of
[provider, results] pairs, and then the search display was updated
from that.
We introduced an asynchronous search system when we wanted to potentially
add a Zeitgeist search provider to the Shell in 3.2. For a while, search
providers were either async or sync, which worked by storing a dummy array
in the results, and adding a method for search providers to add results
later.
Later, we removed the search system entirely and ported the remaining
search providers to simply use the API to modify the empty array, but the
remains of the synchronous search system with its silly array still
lingered.
Finally, it's time to modernize. Promises^WCallbacks are the future.
Port the one remaining in-shell search engine (app search) to the new
callback based system, and simplify the remote search system in the
process.
`a + b ? c : d` is parsed as `(a + b) ? c : d`, not the more intuitive
`a + (b ? c : d)`.
This was causing a bad slide animation and Clutter warnings when coming
out of the overview.
The org.gnome.login-screen schema contains a key to disable the
power/restart buttons; our support for this fell victim to the
new combined status menu, add it back.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=711244
Before, workspacesOnlyOnPrimary was implemented in quite a crazy manner:
* If workspacesOnlyOnPrimary was false, we'd create one WorkspacesView per
monitor, with the primary one being a bit special.
* If workspacesOnlyOnPrimary was true, we'd create one WorkspacesView, and
additional montiors would be handled inside that WorkspacesView as
"extra workspaces".
This caused numerous bugs as the two modes weren't consistently
implemented, and a lot of code was duplicated between all the modes.
Fix this by always creating WorkspaceViews, even if it only handles
one interface. We do this by having two different WorkspacesView-ish
classes: WorkspacesView handles the traditional combination of lots
of workspces, and a new ExtraWorkspaceView is in control of only one
workspace.
Right now, the workspace update code is complex and spread across parts:
WorkspacesView takes a set of workspaces and looks like it owns them, but
WorkspacesDisplay is actually in charge of setting them up and creating
new ones for each WorkspacesView.
Change initialization and handling to move all of the creation/destruction
responsibilities to WorkspacesView.
We pass in monitorIndex into each WorkspacesView, which is a lie in the
workspacesOnlyOnPrimary case, as the primary WorkspacesView currently has
the responsibility of handling the extra workspaces on all the other
monitors. The commit will clean this up and punt the responsibility back
to WorkspacesDisplay.
Not because ClutterActor is bad or wrong, but because I always get
confused on the difference, and having them both in SlideLayout
makes the code a bit easier to read and understand.
The parent SlidingControl had an onOverviewShowing, but we had
overridden it with the same code in both subclasses. Just move it
back to SlidingControl.
