Adding a new window type for frameless non-transient top level windows, used by ChromeOS' window ...

Adding a new window type for frameless non-transient top level windows, used by ChromeOS' window manager.

BUG=chromium-os:16323
TEST=none
Committed: http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=88523

[Ben Goodger (Google), 2011-06-09 03:03:49]

Running this through try now.

[Daniel Erat, 2011-06-09 05:40:22]

LGTM

http://codereview.chromium.org/7129033/diff/4023/views/widget/native_widget_g...
File views/widget/native_widget_gtk.cc (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/7129033/diff/4023/views/widget/native_widget_g...
views/widget/native_widget_gtk.cc:188: default:
mind changing this to:

case Widget::InitParams::TYPE_POPUP:
case Widget::InitParams::TYPE_MENU:
  return GTK_WINDOW_POPUP;
default:
  NOTREACHED();
  return GTK_WIDGET_TOPLEVEL;

?

http://codereview.chromium.org/7129033/diff/4023/views/widget/widget.h
File views/widget/widget.h (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/7129033/diff/4023/views/widget/widget.h#newcode97
views/widget/widget.h:97: TYPE_WINDOW_FRAMELESS,
Naming suggestion: TYPE_WINDOW_UNMANAGED?  That's much more accurate for X, at
least (override-redirect windows are never decorated, but it's also possible to
disable decorations on windows that are still being managed by the window
manager).

I don't know much about the subtleties of WS_POPUP, and
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms632600(v=vs.85).aspx is useless.  I'm
less excited about something like TYPE_WINDOW_FLOATING, but still prefer it to
_FRAMELESS.

[Daniel Erat, 2011-06-09 11:23:42]

http://codereview.chromium.org/7129033/diff/4023/views/widget/widget.h
File views/widget/widget.h (right):

http://codereview.chromium.org/7129033/diff/4023/views/widget/widget.h#newcode97
views/widget/widget.h:97: TYPE_WINDOW_FRAMELESS,
On 2011/06/09 05:40:22, Daniel Erat wrote:
> Naming suggestion: TYPE_WINDOW_UNMANAGED?  That's much more accurate for X, at
> least (override-redirect windows are never decorated, but it's also possible
to
> disable decorations on windows that are still being managed by the window
> manager).
> 
> I don't know much about the subtleties of WS_POPUP, and
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms632600%28v=vs.85%29.aspx is useless.
 I'm
> less excited about something like TYPE_WINDOW_FLOATING, but still prefer it to
> _FRAMELESS.

Whoops, disregard this, of course.  For some reason, I'm more awake at 4 a.m.
than I was when I wrote this comment. :-/

http://developer.gnome.org/gtk/2.24/GtkWindow.html#gtk-window-set-decorated
could be used to get _FRAMELESS to behave as advertised on window managers that
typically draw decorations around windows.

[Ben Goodger (Google), 2011-06-09 13:13:43]

To clarify - what naming strategy did you end up preferring?

On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 4:23 AM, <derat@chromium.org> wrote:

>
> http://codereview.chromium.org/7129033/diff/4023/views/widget/widget.h
> File views/widget/widget.h (right):
>
>
>
http://codereview.chromium.org/7129033/diff/4023/views/widget/widget.h#newcode97
> views/widget/widget.h:97: TYPE_WINDOW_FRAMELESS,
> On 2011/06/09 05:40:22, Daniel Erat wrote:
>
>> Naming suggestion: TYPE_WINDOW_UNMANAGED?  That's much more accurate
>>
> for X, at
>
>> least (override-redirect windows are never decorated, but it's also
>>
> possible to
>
>> disable decorations on windows that are still being managed by the
>>
> window
>
>> manager).
>>
>
>  I don't know much about the subtleties of WS_POPUP, and
>> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms632600%28v=vs.85%29.aspx is
>>
> useless.  I'm
>
>> less excited about something like TYPE_WINDOW_FLOATING, but still
>>
> prefer it to
>
>> _FRAMELESS.
>>
>
> Whoops, disregard this, of course.  For some reason, I'm more awake at 4
> a.m. than I was when I wrote this comment. :-/
>
> http://developer.gnome.org/gtk/2.24/GtkWindow.html#gtk-window-set-decorated
> could be used to get _FRAMELESS to behave as advertised on window
> managers that typically draw decorations around windows.
>
>
> http://codereview.chromium.org/7129033/
>

[Daniel Erat, 2011-06-09 14:35:23]

TYPE_WINDOW_FRAMELESS makes sense to me, assuming that this type is
being used for windows that should still be managed by the WM (perhaps
this concept doesn't map to anything on Windows) but that shouldn't be
decorated.  Is disabling decorations more-or-less what WS_POPUP does?
(http://cboard.cprogramming.com/windows-programming/4937-ws_popup.html
makes it sound like it is.)

On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 06:13, Ben Goodger (Google) <ben@chromium.org> wrote:
> To clarify - what naming strategy did you end up preferring?
>
> On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 4:23 AM, <derat@chromium.org> wrote:
>>
>> http://codereview.chromium.org/7129033/diff/4023/views/widget/widget.h
>> File views/widget/widget.h (right):
>>
>>
>>
http://codereview.chromium.org/7129033/diff/4023/views/widget/widget.h#newcode97
>> views/widget/widget.h:97: TYPE_WINDOW_FRAMELESS,
>> On 2011/06/09 05:40:22, Daniel Erat wrote:
>>>
>>> Naming suggestion: TYPE_WINDOW_UNMANAGED?  That's much more accurate
>>
>> for X, at
>>>
>>> least (override-redirect windows are never decorated, but it's also
>>
>> possible to
>>>
>>> disable decorations on windows that are still being managed by the
>>
>> window
>>>
>>> manager).
>>
>>> I don't know much about the subtleties of WS_POPUP, and
>>> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms632600%28v=vs.85%29.aspx is
>>
>> useless.  I'm
>>>
>>> less excited about something like TYPE_WINDOW_FLOATING, but still
>>
>> prefer it to
>>>
>>> _FRAMELESS.
>>
>> Whoops, disregard this, of course.  For some reason, I'm more awake at 4
>> a.m. than I was when I wrote this comment. :-/
>>
>>
>> http://developer.gnome.org/gtk/2.24/GtkWindow.html#gtk-window-set-decorated
>> could be used to get _FRAMELESS to behave as advertised on window
>> managers that typically draw decorations around windows.
>>
>> http://codereview.chromium.org/7129033/
>
>