Closed
Bug 1087485
Opened 10 years ago
Closed 10 years ago
make atk GetParentCB work for proxies
Categories
(Core :: Disability Access APIs, defect)
Tracking
()
RESOLVED
FIXED
mozilla36
People
(Reporter: tbsaunde, Assigned: tbsaunde)
Details
Attachments
(1 file)
2.97 KB,
patch
|
surkov
:
review+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
No description provided.
Assignee | ||
Comment 1•10 years ago
|
||
Attachment #8509682 -
Flags: review?(surkov.alexander)
Comment 2•10 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8509682 [details] [diff] [review] teach atk to get parents from proxies Review of attachment 8509682 [details] [diff] [review]: ----------------------------------------------------------------- ::: accessible/atk/AccessibleWrap.cpp @@ +796,3 @@ > > + AtkObject* atkParent = nullptr; > + if (AccessibleWrap* wrapper = GetAccessibleWrap(aAtkObj)) { this construction doesn't warn, right (ie you don't need double () ) @@ +804,4 @@ > } > + > + if (atkParent) > + atk_object_set_parent(aAtkObj, atkParent); please fix indentation @@ +992,5 @@ > & ~IS_PROXY); > } > > +AtkObject* > +GetWrapperFor(ProxyAccessible* aProxy) pls reuse it in ProxyDestroyed(), what about to move the method into header? @@ +994,5 @@ > > +AtkObject* > +GetWrapperFor(ProxyAccessible* aProxy) > +{ > + return reinterpret_cast<AtkObject*>(aProxy->GetWrapper() & ~IS_PROXY); btw, there's something wrong with IS_PROXY flag handling, at least it's propose not evident from current code, also ProxyAccessible::GetWrapper() and GetWrapperFor(ProxyAccessible*) return different results but have very close names.
Attachment #8509682 -
Flags: review?(surkov.alexander) → review+
Comment 3•10 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8509682 [details] [diff] [review] teach atk to get parents from proxies Review of attachment 8509682 [details] [diff] [review]: ----------------------------------------------------------------- ::: accessible/atk/AccessibleWrap.cpp @@ +992,5 @@ > & ~IS_PROXY); > } > > +AtkObject* > +GetWrapperFor(ProxyAccessible* aProxy) I missed it is in header so ignore this part
Assignee | ||
Comment 4•10 years ago
|
||
(In reply to alexander :surkov from comment #2) > Comment on attachment 8509682 [details] [diff] [review] > teach atk to get parents from proxies > > Review of attachment 8509682 [details] [diff] [review]: > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > ::: accessible/atk/AccessibleWrap.cpp > @@ +796,3 @@ > > > > + AtkObject* atkParent = nullptr; > > + if (AccessibleWrap* wrapper = GetAccessibleWrap(aAtkObj)) { > > this construction doesn't warn, right (ie you don't need double () ) I don't believe so > @@ +992,5 @@ > > & ~IS_PROXY); > > } > > > > +AtkObject* > > +GetWrapperFor(ProxyAccessible* aProxy) > > pls reuse it in ProxyDestroyed(), what about to move the method into header? there isn't really much point, since in ProxyDestroyed you need to downcast what it returns to MaiAtkObject*. > @@ +994,5 @@ > > > > +AtkObject* > > +GetWrapperFor(ProxyAccessible* aProxy) > > +{ > > + return reinterpret_cast<AtkObject*>(aProxy->GetWrapper() & ~IS_PROXY); > > btw, there's something wrong with IS_PROXY flag handling, at least it's > propose not evident from current code, also what's not clear? ProxyAccessible::GetWrapper() > and GetWrapperFor(ProxyAccessible*) return different results but have very > close names. not really? and how would you change that?
Comment 5•10 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Trevor Saunders (:tbsaunde) from comment #4) > > pls reuse it in ProxyDestroyed(), what about to move the method into header? > > there isn't really much point, since in ProxyDestroyed you need to downcast > what it returns to MaiAtkObject*. primarily code reuse > > @@ +994,5 @@ > > > > > > +AtkObject* > > > +GetWrapperFor(ProxyAccessible* aProxy) > > > +{ > > > + return reinterpret_cast<AtkObject*>(aProxy->GetWrapper() & ~IS_PROXY); > > > > btw, there's something wrong with IS_PROXY flag handling, at least it's > > propose not evident from current code, also > > what's not clear? currently there's no use case for IS_PROXY flag, so it's hard to say but I guess it might be nicer if the flag was hidden by ProxyAccessible implentation > ProxyAccessible::GetWrapper() > > and GetWrapperFor(ProxyAccessible*) return different results but have very > > close names. > > not really? and how would you change that? I don't know what you want to have in the end but I would use different names
Assignee | ||
Comment 6•10 years ago
|
||
(In reply to alexander :surkov from comment #5) > (In reply to Trevor Saunders (:tbsaunde) from comment #4) > > > > pls reuse it in ProxyDestroyed(), what about to move the method into header? > > > > there isn't really much point, since in ProxyDestroyed you need to downcast > > what it returns to MaiAtkObject*. > > primarily code reuse you really aren't reusing anything, I'm pretty sure it was actually longer that way. > > > @@ +994,5 @@ > > > > > > > > +AtkObject* > > > > +GetWrapperFor(ProxyAccessible* aProxy) > > > > +{ > > > > + return reinterpret_cast<AtkObject*>(aProxy->GetWrapper() & ~IS_PROXY); > > > > > > btw, there's something wrong with IS_PROXY flag handling, at least it's > > > propose not evident from current code, also > > > > what's not clear? > > currently there's no use case for IS_PROXY flag, so it's hard to say but I > guess it might be nicer if the flag was hidden by ProxyAccessible huh? doesn't the comment before its definition explain it?
Comment 7•10 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Trevor Saunders (:tbsaunde) from comment #6) > (In reply to alexander :surkov from comment #5) > > > > @@ +994,5 @@ > > > > > > > > > > +AtkObject* > > > > > +GetWrapperFor(ProxyAccessible* aProxy) > > > > > +{ > > > > > + return reinterpret_cast<AtkObject*>(aProxy->GetWrapper() & ~IS_PROXY); > > > > > > > > btw, there's something wrong with IS_PROXY flag handling, at least it's > > > > propose not evident from current code, also > > > > > > what's not clear? > > > > currently there's no use case for IS_PROXY flag, so it's hard to say but I > > guess it might be nicer if the flag was hidden by ProxyAccessible > > huh? doesn't the comment before its definition explain it? nah, my point is different, currently all wrappers are proxies
Comment 8•10 years ago
|
||
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/8e4a24056f31
Assignee: nobody → tbsaunde+mozbugs
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 10 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: --- → mozilla36
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•