[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

bug#25818: 25.2; frame moved off display does not return (OS X)

From: Charles A. Roelli
Subject: bug#25818: 25.2; frame moved off display does not return (OS X)
Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2017 13:15:10 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0

With the current master branch, a child frame might be constrained on OS X 10.9+ with the "Spaces" windowing feature turned on, meaning that a child frame could be forced back into the screen area -- so yes, there could be a case where a child frame doesn't move together with its parent. Maybe that will have to be fixed too; I'm on 10.6 though so I can't test.

Otherwise, though, when child/parent frames are not brought off screen, a child frame always moves with its parent.

My updated patch takes into account the case where "Spaces" is off or unavailable -- if you read the part above what I added:

// If separate spaces is on, it is like each screen is independent. There is
  // no spanning of frames across screens.
  if ([NSScreen screensHaveSeparateSpaces])
      NSTRACE_MSG ("Screens have separate spaces");
      frameRect = [super constrainFrameRect:frameRect toScreen:screen];
      NSTRACE_RETURN_RECT (frameRect);
      return frameRect;

there is nothing there to prevent a child frame from being constrained -- so I will need input from somebody else on that.

On 29/04/2017 12:30, martin rudalics wrote:
> I fixed the patch so that child frames are never constrained (after
> some testing, it seems that a child frame cannot get stuck off screen
> as long as its parent is still visible).  To test this out, evaluate
> the following from emacs -Q,
> (progn
>    (setq test-frame (make-frame `((parent-frame . ,(selected-frame)))))
>    (set-frame-position test-frame 0 500))
> and drag the parent frame down until its child is off screen.

Does this mean that the child frame does _not_ move together with its
parent frame?  That would constitute a major deviation from the other


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]