Windows: Fix mouse handling regression #90382
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Please have a look at #90334 which goes in the opposite direction. Which of the two PRs would be preferable? |
It seems to me like this PR (90382) implements what you suggested in #90334 (review), which also seems like the best solution to me. I don't see the point of having 2 members for this if they need to be in sync. |
akien-mga
approved these changes
Apr 8, 2024
|
Thanks! |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Fixes a regression from #84363. Admittedly, when I made such PR, I was unaware that there were two different flags for controlling windows' activation/focus. It turned out that the flag that I neglected was precisely the one involved when dealing with capture mouse mode. The concern is that by both being unified now, there's potential for other regressions in the other features that depended on the split (either before or after this PR), or maybe the original PR plus this one just makes it all solid.
Fixes #90359.