889512 - no focus event for google's moving textbox

Status: RESOLVED FIXED

(Core :: Disability Access APIs, defect)

Description

[alexander :surkov (:asurkov)]

when you start typeing into textbox at google.com then the textbox is destroyed and new one is created. There's no focus event for new textbox what is confusing for AT.

(was reported by AT vendor, marking blocking 2013q3a11y

Comment 1

[alexander :surkov (:asurkov)]

Attachment: patch

Comment 2

[alexander :surkov (:asurkov)]

(don't forget to retest bug 775536 after this one)

Comment 3

[Trevor Saunders (:tbsaunde)]

I'd prefer this writen without using out args, any reason not to do that?

Comment 4

[alexander :surkov (:asurkov)]

(In reply to Trevor Saunders (:tbsaunde) from comment #3)
> I'd prefer this writen without using out args, any reason not to do that?

what's bad about out args? doing a return value approach when it's not always needed doesn't seem nicer

Comment 5

[Trevor Saunders (:tbsaunde)]

(In reply to alexander :surkov from comment #4)
> (In reply to Trevor Saunders (:tbsaunde) from comment #3)
> > I'd prefer this writen without using out args, any reason not to do that?
> 
> what's bad about out args? doing a return value approach when it's not
> always needed doesn't seem nicer

simpler and looks nicer, what's wrong with it? afaik we have plenty of other functions whose return value is sometimes ignored...

Comment 6

[alexander :surkov (:asurkov)]

(In reply to Trevor Saunders (:tbsaunde) from comment #5)
> (In reply to alexander :surkov from comment #4)
> > (In reply to Trevor Saunders (:tbsaunde) from comment #3)
> > > I'd prefer this writen without using out args, any reason not to do that?
> > 
> > what's bad about out args? doing a return value approach when it's not
> > always needed doesn't seem nicer
> 
> simpler and looks nicer, what's wrong with it? afaik we have plenty of other
> functions whose return value is sometimes ignored...

ok, if you like

Comment 7

[alexander :surkov (:asurkov)]

on another hand out argument is used as a flag to avoid excess focus checks. Are you sure you want to replace that out arg on return value?

Comment 8

[Trevor Saunders (:tbsaunde)]

(In reply to alexander :surkov from comment #7)
> on another hand out argument is used as a flag to avoid excess focus checks.
> Are you sure you want to replace that out arg on return value?

I'm not sure, though don't we need to move more event logic (the popup stuff iirc) into CacheChildrenInsSubtree() so maybe we should add bool needEvents flag?

Comment 9

[alexander :surkov (:asurkov)]

(In reply to Trevor Saunders (:tbsaunde) from comment #8)
> (In reply to alexander :surkov from comment #7)
> > on another hand out argument is used as a flag to avoid excess focus checks.
> > Are you sure you want to replace that out arg on return value?
> 
> I'm not sure, though don't we need to move more event logic (the popup stuff
> iirc) into CacheChildrenInsSubtree() so maybe we should add bool needEvents
> flag?

a small demo of idea? If it's code clean up only then maybe we could file a follow up on it since it's a major issue and the fix seems takes too long.

Comment 10

[Trevor Saunders (:tbsaunde)]

Comment on attachment 771359 [details] [diff] [review]
patch

ok whatever

Comment 11

[alexander :surkov (:asurkov)]

http://hg.mozilla.org/integration/mozilla-inbound/rev/2e7ae68148a6

Comment 12

[Wes Kocher (:KWierso) (Not reading bugmail; email directly if needed)]

https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/2e7ae68148a6