[Mono-dev] Win Patches for Datagrid (first here) then idle

Stifu stifu at free.fr
Mon Jun 18 21:20:38 UTC 2012

No, it's fine.

Rob Wilkens wrote
> Whoops a second problem with the one you posted in the commit you
> mentioned, I think if we're checking >= then we want the results
> reversed...
> -Rob
> On 06/18/2012 05:06 PM, Rob Wilkens wrote:
>> I couldn't see it before you pushed it, and may have done it wrong
>> myself (I don't recall now)..  :-)
>> I'm sure in the case where this version you wrote would result in a zero
>> result, the zero result is probably OK.
>> The version below is probably good if you're ok with it.
>> -Rob
>> On 06/18/2012 04:58 PM, Stifu wrote:
>>> Hah, that thought did cross my mind.
>>> Did you just wait for me to push it before saying that? :p
>>> We could go for:
>>> 			int next_pixel_offset = pixel_offset;
>>> 			if (CurrentColumn < CurrentTableStyle.GridColumnStyles.Count)	
>>> 			{
>>> 				next_pixel_offset +=
>>> CurrentTableStyle.GridColumnStyles[CurrentColumn].Width;
>>> 			}
>>> Rob Wilkens wrote
>>>> Slight issue which probably will never be a problem:
>>>> I'd replace the "0" with "pixel_offset" since the normal condition for
>>>> that is pixel_offset PLUS the current column (which may be invalid)
>>>> width.. 
>>>> I don't think it'll be a problem though and can probably stand as-is.
>>>> -Rob
>>>> On 06/18/2012 04:39 PM, Stifu wrote:
>>>>> Alright, the first patch is in
>>>>> (https://github.com/mono/mono/commit/42ebb31fc143a171a6a5930bc647627c557842ee).
>>>>> I took the liberty to change the coding style.
>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>> Rob Wilkens wrote
>>>>>> This is for Stifu:
>>>>>> Please follow this sequence when applying or testing the patches
>>>>>> listed
>>>>>> below.  Doing in other order may break things.  If you want me to
>>>>>> create
>>>>>> a unit test for something you don't see a unit test for, let me know,
>>>>>> but in some cases, clicks are required with a mouse and i'm not
>>>>>> necessarily sure how to create a patch to do that.
>>>>>> Ok, I've attached the patches i had queued as separate individual
>>>>>> patches, i hope i did this right..  These are from ranges of git
>>>>>> diffs..  Please let me know if there are issues, my feelings won't be
>>>>>> hurt, i'd rather do this right than do it fast.
>>>>>> The order to apply them in (then i'll get into what it fixes after):
>>>>>> I'd suggest the DataGrid patches first because they are in the middle
>>>>>> of
>>>>>> everything and get in the way -- except don't apply the
>>>>>> IdleAndDataGrid.Whitespace.Jun10.patch until you've applied ALL the
>>>>>> patches prior to Jun 10 (including idle patches), those patches in
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> Whitespace patch don't fix anything other the prettying up the code,
>>>>>> but
>>>>>> they depend on both set of patches in sequence..
>>>>>> So the sequence i'm suggesting they must be applied in if they are
>>>>>> applied at all are:
>>>>>> (1) DataGrid1.Jun3.patch first
>>>>>> (2) DataGrid2.Jun4.patch second
>>>>>> (3) DataGrid3.Novell322563.jun4.patch third
>>>>>> (4) DataGrid4.Novell322154.jun6.patch
>>>>>> -- but don't do the other one i said not to do at this point --
>>>>>> now to the idle fixes, these next ones (5-9) are meant to all be
>>>>>> applied
>>>>>> as part of essentially one patch for it to work, but is broken up so
>>>>>> you
>>>>>> can see progression.
>>>>>> (5) Idle1-3.Jun2 (sorry for forgetting patch extension), This
>>>>>> contains 3
>>>>>> commits in one but they were all related, and makes life easier by
>>>>>> being
>>>>>> summarized into one like this.
>>>>>> (6) Now you should do IdleAndDataGrid.Whitespace.Jun10.patch
>>>>>> (7) Next, do Idle-Win32IdleEnable.jun11.patch
>>>>>> (8) Idle-RaceConditionFix-Jun12.patch is next
>>>>>> (9) Idle-TestFixForIdle.jun12.patch is last
>>>>>> There, I have 9 attachments, and above is the sequence to apply them
>>>>>> in.
>>>>>> The below numbering system matches the above patch order
>>>>>> #1: from the commit message:
>>>>>> The sample code in
>>>>>> https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=MONO79788 was crashing on
>>>>>> me
>>>>>> if I clicked on a row header (where the + was). I investigated and
>>>>>> found
>>>>>> that it was because, when the table had no data to display yet, and
>>>>>> if
>>>>>> you clicked on a row header (that's the area to the left of what
>>>>>> would
>>>>>> be the data), as part of assigning the current cell, it would call
>>>>>> ensure cell visibility function, which would call
>>>>>> ScrollToColumnInPixels
>>>>>> which would try to get the next pixel offset by looking at
>>>>>> CurrentTableStyle.GridColumnStyles[CurrentColumn].Width, but when no
>>>>>> data was being displayed there were no columns. So while current
>>>>>> column
>>>>>> had a value of zero, there were no items in the GridColumnStyles
>>>>>> Array/List, even at zero index. The fix for this was before indexing
>>>>>> into GridColumnStyles to Check The Length to make sure we're not
>>>>>> going
>>>>>> beyond its bounds. It is probably perfectly acceptable if we're
>>>>>> beyond
>>>>>> the bounds to just leave this value at zero for the offset.
>>>>>> #2 From the commit message:
>>>>>> Xamaring bug 5511: This fixes this and some side issues..
>>>>>> First, fixed the crash by creating two additional stacks for when
>>>>>> navigating to and from other sub tables... Both were 'style' stacks
>>>>>> which tracked per column styles. Those needed to be updated and reset
>>>>>> on
>>>>>> a per table basis. Second, When navigating forward or back, EndEdit
>>>>>> needed to be called so that we don't leave an editing cell open when
>>>>>> we
>>>>>> navigate, otherwise there was the possibility and reality that the
>>>>>> edited cell would still be visible and editing on the next table
>>>>>> either
>>>>>> forward or back. To recreate this on the sample code, presuming you
>>>>>> can
>>>>>> get past the initial crash which was fixed here, this could be
>>>>>> illustrated without the endedits that were added as follows : Run: 1.
>>>>>> click + 2. click pb 3. click + 4. click pb 3. click + 5. click pd 6.
>>>>>> click back 6. click pc 7. See 0 highlighted in column header from
>>>>>> previous table Finally, I modified some previous submissions on a
>>>>>> related problem so that they had more "Love for Spaces" (whitespace)
>>>>>> without changing the actual code other than that.
>>>>>> The above may have fixed, i think it was 5510 too.
>>>>>> #3: From the commit
>>>>>> This solves PART of Novell Bugzilla Issue #322563
>>>>>> https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=322563 What this
>>>>>> accomplishes is that it hides the non browsable columns (columns that
>>>>>> were not part of the original dataset, in the test case) from view in
>>>>>> the DataGrid. Unfortunately, i can't see an obvious way to hide
>>>>>> the'parent rows' display of those non browsable columns value. That
>>>>>> is
>>>>>> if You viewed a subtable off hidden field pb_Id=0 it would show that
>>>>>> value (pb_Id=0) on the top of the datagrid where it shows the
>>>>>> previous
>>>>>> rows. The remaining issue seems to be a non major issue since it is a
>>>>>> non functional issue.
>>>>>> #4: From the commit
>>>>>> Novell #323154
>>>>>> Decided to include this in same branch (same pull request) as earlier
>>>>>> changes due to it affecting the same DataGrid.cs -- i didn't want any
>>>>>> conflicts. Here's a copy of what i wrote up earlier about this: the
>>>>>> problem report is here:
>>>>>> https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=323154 I found by
>>>>>> deduction
>>>>>> that the repaint wasn't cancelling the active edit box after the row
>>>>>> was
>>>>>> deleted .. So while the table updated, the edit box with the old
>>>>>> value
>>>>>> didn't go away... The repaint was initiated from an Invalidate call
>>>>>> which stack trace looked something like this:
>>>>>> System.Windows.Forms.DataGrid.CalcAreasAndInvalidate() at
>>>>>> System.Windows.Forms.DataGrid.RecreateDataGridRows(Boolean recalc) at
>>>>>> System.Windows.Forms.DataGrid.OnListManagerItemChanged(System.Object
>>>>>> sender, System.Windows.Forms.ItemChangedEventArgs e) at
>>>>>> System.Windows.Forms.CurrencyManager.OnItemChanged(System.Windows.Forms.ItemChangedEventArgs
>>>>>> e) at System.Windows.Forms.CurrencyManager.UpdateIsBinding() at
>>>>>> System.Windows.Forms.CurrencyManager.ListChangedHandler(System.Object
>>>>>> sender, System.ComponentModel.ListChangedEventArgs e) at
>>>>>> System.Data.DataView.OnListChanged(System.ComponentModel.ListChangedEventArgs
>>>>>> e) at System.Data.DataView.OnRowDeleted(System.Object sender,
>>>>>> System.Data.DataRowChangeEventArgs args) at
>>>>>> System.Data.DataTable.OnRowDeleted(System.Data.DataRowChangeEventArgs
>>>>>> e)
>>>>>> at System.Data.DataTable.DeletedDataRow(System.Data.DataRow dr,
>>>>>> DataRowAction action) at System.Data.DataRow.Delete() at
>>>>>> System.Data.DataView.Delete(Int32 index) at
>>>>>> System.Data.DataRowView.Delete() at grid.ProcessCmdKey(Message ByRef
>>>>>> msg, Keys keyData) (etc) ProcessCmdKey is from user code in sample in
>>>>>> bug report... After the delete (as seen above), the first thing the
>>>>>> DataGrid gets back is an OnListManagerItemChanged... Before that
>>>>>> would
>>>>>> call RecreateDataGridRows(), if it was going to do that, i inserted a
>>>>>> check to see if we're editing, and if so, i cancel the edit (because
>>>>>> we're reloading dataset), here is a summary of what my patch will
>>>>>> look
>>>>>> like in ONListManagerItemChanged in DataGrid.cs in
>>>>>> System.Windows.Forms
>>>>>> directory: if (rows == null || RowsCount != rows.Length -
>>>>>> (ShowEditRow ?
>>>>>> 1 : 0)) + { + if (is_editing) + CancelEditing ();
>>>>>> RecreateDataGridRows
>>>>>> (true); + } This solved the problem reported. It is now identical to
>>>>>> windows .net behavior from what i can see, as far as this problem
>>>>>> report
>>>>>> goes anyway. MS .NET Crashes as well as mono in the sample code if
>>>>>> you
>>>>>> press a key twice to delete two rows when there was only one row to
>>>>>> delete (index out of range). This is not necessarily a good thing,
>>>>>> but
>>>>>> it's user code from the bug report which causes that, not anything
>>>>>> inherently different in mono.
>>>>>> #5-#9 are all about fixing bug From Novell #321541 which if i have
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> right number is adding the ability to have the idle event handler
>>>>>> only
>>>>>> send idle events to the thread the idle handler was assigned in.  So
>>>>>> if
>>>>>> you have 2 threads, and they each assigned an idle event handler,
>>>>>> they
>>>>>> would each get their own idle event handler called when that thread
>>>>>> went
>>>>>> idle.  Or if only one thread had an idle event handler assigned that
>>>>>> same idle handler wouldn't be called for EVERY thread, it would only
>>>>>> be
>>>>>> called on the thread it was assigned on.  This is so it more closely
>>>>>> matches the windows .net behavior.
>>>>>> I'll include each of the individual commit messages though they were
>>>>>> all
>>>>>> towards the same goal
>>>>>> #5 had three commits:
>>>>>> This addresses a 6-year old Novell bugzilla issue: 321541...
>>>>>> Created a hashtable of per-thread event handlers for idle.. Assigned
>>>>>> in
>>>>>> to that hashtable when the regular Idle eventhandler was assigned by
>>>>>> mapping it by ManagedThreadId. The hashtable had to use a separate
>>>>>> object (different class) rather than an EventHandler directly,
>>>>>> because
>>>>>> an eventhandler apparently cannot be assigned to another object, it
>>>>>> can
>>>>>> only be a part of a class. It also couldn't be checked for null or
>>>>>> called from outside the class so i handled that as appropriate (by
>>>>>> secondary callers). This has been checked against the code in 321541
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> the code appears to work fine now. I have also confirmed no new unit
>>>>>> test failures have been introduced by this change. There were 3
>>>>>> failures
>>>>>> before, and are three failures now. Also, This includes a unit test,
>>>>>> which will fail without this patch. Here's a shortcut to the Novell
>>>>>> bug:
>>>>>> https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=321541
>>>>>> Per suggestion, Changed a Hashtable to a generic dictionary.
>>>>>> This change is to properly use the GenericDictionary to use
>>>>>> the EventHandler type directly rather than the temporary class that
>>>>>> was
>>>>>> being used in my first attempt at this.
>>>>>> (so some of the changes from the first commit you don't see here
>>>>>> because
>>>>>> they were thrown away by the second and third in a rewrite)
>>>>>> #6 is a bunch of whitespace fixes for Datagrid and idle which has to
>>>>>> be
>>>>>> applied at this point in sequence.
>>>>>> #7 Enables the idle message to work on Win32.  When i tested on Win32
>>>>>> i
>>>>>> realized the Idle event handler was never called, so i fixed that so
>>>>>> when it went idle it would call it.
>>>>>> Here's the commit from #7:
>>>>>> This patch will enable the idle event to be called when the
>>>>>> applicati...
>>>>>> ...on is idle on Win32. This was necessary to make an earlier unit
>>>>>> test
>>>>>> from the same set of patches work on win32. Plus, it's a good idea.
>>>>>> #8 This is important, essentially this had a lock set to stop a race
>>>>>> condition that was happening with the test. There was an 'if
>>>>>> something
>>>>>> == null assign something to something new... And two threads were
>>>>>> hitting this code at the same time and this was causing one thread to
>>>>>> assign it, and before it would start working with it, thread 2 would
>>>>>> reassign it, and this resulted in a stack dump (exception) in
>>>>>> add_Idle,
>>>>>> this fix seemed to stop that.
>>>>>> Here's the commit message
>>>>>> This code fixes a possible race condition which during my testing
>>>>>> seemed
>>>>>> to be hit about once every twenty runs or so. Sometimes if two
>>>>>> threads
>>>>>> were assigning the idle handler at the same time, and it's the first
>>>>>> assignment, they will both try to assign a new dictionary. This
>>>>>> resulted
>>>>>> in funny behavior, such as immediately after an add, the item
>>>>>> wouldn't
>>>>>> be found. After applying this fix, a lock around that particular
>>>>>> check/assignment, I reran the tests about 50-75 times and never ran
>>>>>> into
>>>>>> this race condition again.
>>>>>> #9 the last one is just some test changes after what i was told about
>>>>>> mono requiring that all threads create the forms in the same thread.
>>>>>> This only seemed to be a problem on windows, from what i recall, and
>>>>>> only occasionally.
>>>>>> The commit message reads:
>>>>>> Due to a WinForms requriement (which only seems to occasionally be a
>>>>>> problem on Windows), where all Controls (including Forms) must be
>>>>>> created on One Thread, and then to do work on them from other threads
>>>>>> only by use of invoke ( According to :
>>>>>> http://www.mono-project.com/FAQ:_Winforms ), I modified my unit test
>>>>>> accordingly to be in compliance.
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Mono-devel-list mailing list
>>>>>> Mono-devel-list at .ximian
>>>>>> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list
>>>>> --
>>>>> View this message in context:
>>>>> http://mono.1490590.n4.nabble.com/Win-Patches-for-Datagrid-first-here-then-idle-tp4650027p4650048.html
>>>>> Sent from the Mono - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Mono-devel-list mailing list
>>>>> Mono-devel-list at .ximian
>>>>> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Mono-devel-list mailing list
>>>> Mono-devel-list at .ximian
>>>> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list
>>> --
>>> View this message in context:
>>> http://mono.1490590.n4.nabble.com/Win-Patches-for-Datagrid-first-here-then-idle-tp4650027p4650052.html
>>> Sent from the Mono - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Mono-devel-list mailing list
>>> Mono-devel-list at .ximian
>>> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list
> _______________________________________________
> Mono-devel-list mailing list
> Mono-devel-list at .ximian
> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list

View this message in context: http://mono.1490590.n4.nabble.com/Win-Patches-for-Datagrid-first-here-then-idle-tp4650027p4650057.html
Sent from the Mono - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

More information about the Mono-devel-list mailing list