I am writing c++ library in Linux using gcc.
Program opens web pages in new browser windows with
system("firefox https://www.webpage.com");
After that I use xlib to determine identifiers of each opened browser window.
Then program raises firefox windows one by one using
XRaiseWindow(display, window)
in order to make a screenshot of each window and OCR.
But if I close browser window manually and try to use
XRaiseWindow with the corresponding identifier it generates BadWindow error and terminates the program.
So how can I check in xlib if window with given window identifier exists?
From the X FAQ:
169) How do I check whether a window ID is valid?
My program has the ID of a window on a remote display.
I want to check whether the window exists before doing anything with it.
Because X is asynchronous, there isn't a guarantee that the window
would still exist between the time that you got the ID and the time you
sent an event to the window or otherwise manipulated it. What you should
do is send the event without checking, but install an error handler to
catch any BadWindow errors, which would indicate that the window no
longer exists. This scheme will work except on the [rare] occasion that
the original window has been destroyed and its ID reallocated to another
window.
You can use this scheme to make a function which checks the validity
of a window; you can make this operation almost synchronous by calling
XSync() after the request, although there is still no guarantee that the
window will exist after the result (unless the sterver is grabbed). On the
　whole, catching the error rather than pre-checking is preferable.
Long story short: You can't :P You can only damage control.
Related
When my application is minimized, and the application programmatically closes a child window, the state of the child window between my framework and MFC goes out of sync because MFC will not send a WM_SHOWWINDOW message when the application is minimized. I noticed that Qt had the same problem: https://codereview.qt-project.org/#/c/93410/
Things that I have tried:
Override OnShowWindow() -- if the states are out of sync, then I alter the BOOL parameter before passing it to the CDialog::OnShowWindow. But doing so does nothing. It is as if the BOOL parameter given to the override is read-only.
Handle WM_SHOWWINDOW in PreTranslateMessage -- this does not work because WM_SHOWWINDOW does not appear here.
I know I can check SW_PARENTOPENING to know when to look for out-of-sync problems and handle it, but I just don't know where is the best place to do it.
My current solution is to override OnShowWindow, check for SW_PARENTOPENING, then post a SW_HIDE. It works, but it feels like a waste because I should be able to prevent it from restoring entirely rather than defer it.
Summary:
Basically, I am just programmatically closing a window, say from a timer call, or user's remote command, or whatever, while the main application is minimized. The dialog will be temporarily hidden when minimized (the MFC framework will automatically call ShowWindow(SW_HIDE) but with an internal flag to re-open when the app is restored). If my program sends ShowWindow(SW_HIDE) now, this call will not be registered, and the window will be re-opened by MFC when the app is maximized. To my user, he/she has closed the window remotely and does not expect the window to re-appear, so I need to re-call my ignored ShowWindow(SW_HIDE) somehow when restoring the main app.
I am learning MFC programming with the book "Programming Windows with MFC (2nd Edition)". I have some questions about the book example from chapter 9.
When I open a file or click new file, the function CSquaresView::OnDraw() is called. I checked the stack, the reason is that CView::OnPaint() calls this function.
But I don't understand how CView::OnPaint() is called. Is the message WM_PAINT generated if CSingleDocTemplate::OpenDocumentFile() is called by the default setting? Is
it possible to change the behavior?
Thanks,
Brian
WM_PAINT is triggered for every window that just was created and gets visible.
But internally the following code is executed (depending of MDI/SDI) that forces a window update:
CSingle/MultiDocTemplate::OpenDocumentFile.
So either a new CDocument is created or a previous one is reused and prepared.
A new Frame window is created or reused.
The new view is created or the old ne reused.
finally InitialUpdateFrame is called!
InitialUpdateFrame sends a message to all created frames and this finally causes CView::OnInitialUpdate to be called.
OnInitialUpdate just calles again CView::OnUpdate and the default implementation calles CWnd::Invalidate
Now on the next turn in the message loop the window receives a WM_PAINT message.
Preventing OnDraw to be executed wouldn't be wise, because the contents of your document can't be displayed to the user in this case. And this has to be done, always when the window is new, or the contents of the document just changed (here it changed after loading a new document).
While I don't have the book or know what the sample is about (and I don't think many readers of this do...), I conjecture that the reason you're getting a WM_PAINT is because a file open dialog is opened which covers your drawing area at some point, and when it is closed, that area is invalidated. Is that possible?
Am I missing something? This is standard windows behavior. CView::OnPaint() is called because windows has generated WM_PAINT message. If you are debugging and set a break point in OnDraw() it will always break there because the debugger and application takes turns to run (but unless you application is running on a separate monitor) and WM_PAINT is generated. If you do want to stop redrawing though, try SetRedraw
I have a third party encryption library, which may create a MessageBox if key creation fails. The failure can be caused by bad random number generation or other rarities, and in most cases, trying again will result in success. My code will attempt key creation up to three times before deciding it failed.
Now, the issue is that the program may be used with automation. If a MessageBox is created during automation, it will block the process forever, because there's nobody to click the 'OK' button.
Does anyone know of a way to catch when this message box is created and automatically close it?
Anything is fair game, as long as it's not something that will make security suites angry. This means no hooking or code tunneling.
In summary, I need to catch when a MessageBox is created and close it. The MessageBox's creation is outside of my control. Modifying the code at runtime is not acceptable.
Also, I've noticed there are some other similar questions, but they don't have the same requirements.
EDIT: Additional note, I can find the message box via searching through all windows until I find one with a matching title and then send it a WM_CLOSE message, but I don't think this is a great solution. I also have no guarantee that the message box has been/will be displayed, or how long after my call it will be displayed. It could display instantly, it could display 1200 ms later, or it could not display at all.
Just before you begin the encryption process, install a WH_CBT hook, and in its callback watch for an nCode of HCBT_CREATEWND. If you get a matching class name ('#32770 (Dialog)' ?) and a matching title either return a nonzero value from the callback, or if that doesn't work post a WM_CLOSE (or a BM_CLICK to a relevant button if selecting an option is necessary). Uninstall the hook after the process for not messing with every possible dialog your application pops up.
That sounds like bad design on the part of that library. Generally any sort of utility library (like encryption) has no business invoking any kind of GUI (unless you explicitly ask it to).
Is there possibly some configuration or setting in this library that could disable its use of message boxes?
If not, I'd suggest that you might want to investigate using a different library. After all, if the designers of this library have already made this kind of poor design decision once, then there may be other unfortunate surprises lurking in there.
You can hope that it will be found by GetForegroundWindow, but this may catch other applications. The more brute force way is to iterate over all windows with EnumWindows looking for something that has a caption or text equal to this shown by the library.
I have once "remote controlled" an application by sending mouse click events to some controls. I guess you would have to do this in a separate thread that is watching for Events if a window is opened. Pretty ugly but working...
Create a new thread. If your function fails and a Message Box is opened, obtain a handle to the message box by looping through the windows (GetTopWindow, GetNextWindow) and comparing the window's process id to the one returned from GetCurrentProcessId().
Or, you can avoid all the hard work and just hook the MessageBox API with detours. It's not very hard, and if you don't want to pay for detours, you can do it manually.
Call VirtualProtect and set the memory protection at MessageBox at PAGE_EXECUTE_READWRITE
Create a naked function, and use it as a trampoline.
Create a function identical in parameters to MessageBox (this will be your hook)
Create a jump from MessageBox to your hook function.
I have an MFC application that spawns a number of different worker threads and is compiled with VS2003.
When calling CTreeCtrl::GetItemState() I'm occasionally getting a debug assertion dialog popup. I'm assuming that this is because I've passed in a handle to an invalid item but this isn't my immediate concern.
My concern is: From my logs, it looks as though the MFC thread continues to service a number of windows messages whilst the assert dialog is being displayed. I thought the assert dialog was modal so I was wondering if this was even possible?
The message box that shows the assertion failure has a message pump for its own purposes. But it'll dispatch all messages that come in, not just those for the message box (otherwise things could get blocked).
With a normal modal dialog, this isn't a problem because the parent window is typically disabled for the duration of the dialog.
The code that launches the assertion dialog must've failed to figure out the parent window, and thus it wasn't disabled. This can happen if your main window isn't the active window at the time of the assertion. Other things can go wrong as well.
You can change how Visual Studio's C run-time library reports assertion failures with _CrtSetReportMode. You can make it stop in the debugger and/or log to the output window instead of trying to show the dialog.
Dialogs (even a messagebox) need to pump the message queue, even if they're modal. Otherwise how would they know you clicked on the "OK" button?
If you need to stop everything when an assert triggers it's usually not too difficult to write your own implementation of assert() (or ASSERT() or whatever) that will break into the debugger instead of displaying a messagebox that asks if you want to break into the debugger (maybe only if it determines that the debugger is attached).
I am having trouble getting a global system hook to work. I want to be notified whenever a window is moving, as early as possible, and change the window size. This means the CBT hook HCBT_MOVESIZE won't cut it, it only happens after the window has been moved. I want to hook the actual movement of the window, and be able to change the window size during the move.
The hooks are set from a DLL, and the callback function is within that DLL. This is what I've tried.
WH_CALLWNDPROC. It does alert me when a window is moved (WM_MOVING is received for windows from other applications), but I cannot change the contents of the message.
WH_CALLWNDPROCRET Same as WH_CALLWNDPROC.
CBT hook HCBT_MOVESIZE. Event happens to late.
WH_GETMESSAGE. Never receive WM_MOVE, WM_MOVING or WM_WINDOWPOSCHANGING. This hook would allow me to change the messages.
Update: Windows event hooks seem to allow me to capture it:
hWinEventHook = SetWinEventHook(EVENT_SYSTEM_MOVESIZESTART,
EVENT_SYSTEM_MOVESIZEEND, NULL, WinEventProc,
0, 0, WINEVENT_OUTOFCONTEXT | WINEVENT_SKIPOWNPROCESS);
However, this creates a different problem: changing the size of the window using SetWindowPos() does not work (it changes size alright, but immediately changes back to its previous size), even though I use SWP_NOSENDCHANGING. Ideas?
Update 2: Subclassing seems to work, however Visual Studio crashes after each program run (so does a lot of other windows). It works well if I place breakpoints and walk through the "unsubclassing", but not when I let the program run by itself. Ideas?
I have a CBT hook (it was there from earlier), and whenever HCBT_ACTIVATE is sent for a new window, I remove any previous subclassing using SetWindowLongPtr() (this has to run on 64-bit as well), and then subclass the new window. If I put a breakpoint anywhere, and immediately resume the session when it breaks, everything works fine. However, when I do not have any breakpoints, Visual Studio crashes when the program exits.
Hm, I would've thought that HCBT_MOVESIZE is precisely what you want, given that the MSDN says this about CBT hooks:
The system calls this function before activating, creating, destroying,
minimizing, maximizing, moving, or sizing a window.
and in particular:
HCBT_MOVESIZE
A window is about to be moved or sized.
(these quotes were taken from http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms644977%28VS.85%29.aspx)
...so I'd have thought that you get the HCBT_MOVESIZE call in time. The hook function which handles HCBT_MOVESIZE is also allowed to return an integer so that the system can determine whether the operation is allowed or should be prevented. Hence, given that the HCBT_MOVESIZE hook should get an option to prevent the operation, I'd say it's called before the move event occurred.
Are you really sure the hook function is called after the move event? If you do a GetWindowRect call on the particular handle within your hook function, does the returned rect equal the rectangle which is passed to the hook function?
Hooks are pretty heavy. You only want to use them when you absolutely have to.
That said, you could use one of the basic hooks simply as a way to get into the process. Once in the process, you could subclass the window you're interested in and handle the sizing messages in your subclass proc rather than trying to catch everything at the hook level.
Depending on what you want to do in response to the resize, you might need some interprocess communication.