Windows Client Needs to Support Tab...

[GeoffreyF67]

I've got a computer I'd like to start using that's running Win2000. Unfortunately it doesn't have a mouse attached to it. To make matters worse...the SeventeenOrBust windows client does not have tab stops on any of the buttons so I can't configure it or even get it started.

Please add support for tab stops. Thanks

G-Man

[MathGuy]

See this thread:

http://www.free-dc.org/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2306

there is an automation utility there that will at least allow you to get started (it fires up SB, presses the start button, then goes away). I also have a program that I'm testing at the moment (hopefully done by the end of the week) that will do the same thing, but with multiple instances of the client, running as a service.

This won't help you with configuration (that can be done directly in the registry if you need to), but it will allow you to start the client.

[jjjjL]

Adding in tab support is actually incredibly hard. I should say, it's incredibly hard when you use VC++ and don't use their built in devel tools to make cookie-cutter apps. To do this manually requires terrible, terrible API calls and hooks that I can't master.

-Louie

[GeoffreyF67]

If you can't do that how about setting a hotkey for each of the buttons?

[Mierin]

Originally posted by jjjjL
Adding in tab support is actually incredibly hard. I should say, it's incredibly hard when you use VC++ and don't use their built in devel tools to make cookie-cutter apps.

-Louie

I don't know if you are using MFC or not, so I will assume not. If you use CreateWindow tabs are relatively hard. If you use CreateDialog tabs are automatic.

Do you have source code available. I am able to help.

DP

[jjjjL]

No MFC and CreateWindow. Yeah, I know Dialog's do it automagically. I don't think it's a matter of just changing a line of code though.. wouldn't I have to rewrite the message handler amoung other things?

-Louie

[Mierin]

It is not a trivial change. You wouldn't have to rewrite the entire Message handler. Mainly you replace WM_CREATE with WM_INITDIALOG and don't call DefWindowProc and the end, just return false.

But there are other problems. If you want to keep your icon and such you need to change your class registration to be based on a dialog class (I think it's mainly just a matter of setting the extra memory paramater to the right thing). Then you need to create a dialog template with that class name.

Since you already have all the CreateWindow calls for the children you could make your template blank and keep the code the same, but in the future if you want dialog looking things it is so much easier to put all the children in the template.

DP ([email protected])

[Mierin]

Thank god for no MFC. It does help get a bunch of base functionality for free, but then is worthless after that.

DP

[David A. Braun]

Too bad - the UI would have been trivial to write - and to write with the correct behavior - with MFC. Blah, maybe 25k added to the executable - so what - there's a tradeoff between amount of work and ideal size and perf (for the UI I mean - obviously perf for the algorithm is paramount) - make your life easy.

At *least* use create dialog (this is NOT mfc) - it is not that hard to do. You can then create the dialog with any dialog editor and it will automatically have hotkeys and correct tab order (assuming you set it right in the dialog editor) - no special code needed and the dialog handler is not really much different than a window handler (in fact it is simpler.)

I'll do it *for* you if you want. I'll tell you this: you probably spent more time figuring out how to mimimize to the systray "manually" than you'd spend on all of the UI with mfc _or_ create dialog. Mimimizing to the systray is not very easy.

I don't understand people's aversion to MFC - this is exactly the type of app MFC is best for (relatively simple UI - no real care about "maximum UI performance" - the guts of the app are yours and are totally seperate.)

David

[Lagardo]

OK, so can someone explain to me the economics of a computer that has several hundreds of dollars worth of OS on it (Win2000) but no mouse attached (a $5 item if you splurge, less if you pay attention).

I can see shaving off a few bucks by skimping on a mouse, but then I cannot see running an OS on such a machine that forces a GUI on you and costs lots of money.

Or maybe I'm just a dense little lizard today.

[eatmadustch]

and even IF you can't afford a mouse -- there's still a virtual mouse that comes with disabled people ... you just use the arrow keys!