2021-04-05 11:07:55 -05:00
|
|
|
// Copyright (c) Microsoft Corporation.
|
|
|
|
|
// Licensed under the MIT license.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#include "pch.h"
|
|
|
|
|
#include "../TerminalControl/EventArgs.h"
|
Split `TermControl` into a Core, Interactivity, and Control layer (#9820)
## Summary of the Pull Request
Brace yourselves, it's finally here. This PR does the dirty work of splitting the monolithic `TermControl` into three components. These components are:
* `ControlCore`: This encapsulates the `Terminal` instance, the `DxEngine` and `Renderer`, and the `Connection`. This is intended to everything that someone might need to stand up a terminal instance in a control, but without any regard for how the UX works.
* `ControlInteractivity`: This is a wrapper for the `ControlCore`, which holds the logic for things like double-click, right click copy/paste, selection, etc. This is intended to be a UI framework-independent abstraction. The methods this layer exposes can be called the same from both the WinUI TermControl and the WPF control.
* `TermControl`: This is the UWP control. It's got a Core and Interactivity inside it, which it uses for the actual logic of the terminal itself. TermControl's main responsibility is now
By splitting into smaller pieces, it will enable us to
* write unit tests for the `Core` and `Interactivity` bits, which we desparately need
* Combine `ControlCore` and `ControlInteractivity` in an out-of-proc core process in the future, to enable tab tearout.
However, we're not doing that work quite yet. There's still lots of work to be done to enable that, thought this is likely the biggest portion.
Ideally, this would just be methods moved wholesale from one file to another. Unfortunately, there are a bunch of cases where that didn't work as well as expected. Especially when trying to better enforce the boundary between the classes.
We've got a couple tests here that I've added. These are partially examples, and partially things I ran into while implementing this. A bunch of things from #7001 can go in now that we have this.
This PR is gonna be a huge pain to review - 38 files with 3,730 additions and 1,661 deletions is nothing to scoff at. It will also conflict 100% with anything that's targeting `TermControl`. I'm hoping we can review this over the course of the next week and just be done with it, and leave plenty of runway for 1.9 bugs in post.
## References
* In pursuit of #1256
* Proc Model: #5000
* https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5
## PR Checklist
* [x] Closes #6842
* [x] Closes https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5#card-50760249
* [x] Closes https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5#card-50760258
* [x] I work here
* [x] Tests added/passed
* [n/a] Requires documentation to be updated
## Detailed Description of the Pull Request / Additional comments
* I don't love the names `ControlCore` and `ControlInteractivity`. Open to other names.
* I added a `ICoreState` interface for "properties that come from the `ControlCore`, but consumers of the `TermControl` need to know". In the future, these will all need to be handled specially, because they might involve an RPC call to retrieve the info from the core (or cache it) in the window process.
* I've added more `EventArgs` to make more events proper `TypedEvent`s.
* I've changed how the TerminalApp layer requests updated TaskbarProgress state. It doesn't need to pump TermControl to raise a new event anymore.
* ~~Something that snuck into this branch in the very long history is the switch to `DCompositionCreateSurfaceHandle` for the `DxEngine`. @miniksa wrote this originally in 30b8335, I'm just finally committing it here. We'll need that in the future for the out-of-proc stuff.~~
* I reverted this in c113b65d9. We can revert _that_ commit when we want to come back to it.
* I've changed the acrylic handler a decent amount. But added tests!
* All the `ThrottledFunc` things are left in `TermControl`. Some might be able to move down into core/interactivity, but once we figure out how to use a different kind of Dispatcher (because a UI thread won't necessarily exist for those components).
* I've undoubtably messed up the merging of the locking around the appearance config stuff recently
## Validation Steps Performed
I've got a rolling list in https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/issues/6842#issuecomment-810990460 that I'm updating as I go.
2021-04-27 10:50:45 -05:00
|
|
|
#include "../TerminalControl/ControlCore.h"
|
|
|
|
|
#include "MockControlSettings.h"
|
|
|
|
|
#include "MockConnection.h"
|
2022-03-29 17:16:57 -05:00
|
|
|
#include "../../inc/TestUtils.h"
|
2021-04-05 11:07:55 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
using namespace Microsoft::Console;
|
|
|
|
|
using namespace WEX::Logging;
|
|
|
|
|
using namespace WEX::TestExecution;
|
|
|
|
|
using namespace WEX::Common;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
using namespace winrt;
|
|
|
|
|
using namespace winrt::Microsoft::Terminal;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
namespace ControlUnitTests
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
class ControlCoreTests
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
BEGIN_TEST_CLASS(ControlCoreTests)
|
Split `TermControl` into a Core, Interactivity, and Control layer (#9820)
## Summary of the Pull Request
Brace yourselves, it's finally here. This PR does the dirty work of splitting the monolithic `TermControl` into three components. These components are:
* `ControlCore`: This encapsulates the `Terminal` instance, the `DxEngine` and `Renderer`, and the `Connection`. This is intended to everything that someone might need to stand up a terminal instance in a control, but without any regard for how the UX works.
* `ControlInteractivity`: This is a wrapper for the `ControlCore`, which holds the logic for things like double-click, right click copy/paste, selection, etc. This is intended to be a UI framework-independent abstraction. The methods this layer exposes can be called the same from both the WinUI TermControl and the WPF control.
* `TermControl`: This is the UWP control. It's got a Core and Interactivity inside it, which it uses for the actual logic of the terminal itself. TermControl's main responsibility is now
By splitting into smaller pieces, it will enable us to
* write unit tests for the `Core` and `Interactivity` bits, which we desparately need
* Combine `ControlCore` and `ControlInteractivity` in an out-of-proc core process in the future, to enable tab tearout.
However, we're not doing that work quite yet. There's still lots of work to be done to enable that, thought this is likely the biggest portion.
Ideally, this would just be methods moved wholesale from one file to another. Unfortunately, there are a bunch of cases where that didn't work as well as expected. Especially when trying to better enforce the boundary between the classes.
We've got a couple tests here that I've added. These are partially examples, and partially things I ran into while implementing this. A bunch of things from #7001 can go in now that we have this.
This PR is gonna be a huge pain to review - 38 files with 3,730 additions and 1,661 deletions is nothing to scoff at. It will also conflict 100% with anything that's targeting `TermControl`. I'm hoping we can review this over the course of the next week and just be done with it, and leave plenty of runway for 1.9 bugs in post.
## References
* In pursuit of #1256
* Proc Model: #5000
* https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5
## PR Checklist
* [x] Closes #6842
* [x] Closes https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5#card-50760249
* [x] Closes https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5#card-50760258
* [x] I work here
* [x] Tests added/passed
* [n/a] Requires documentation to be updated
## Detailed Description of the Pull Request / Additional comments
* I don't love the names `ControlCore` and `ControlInteractivity`. Open to other names.
* I added a `ICoreState` interface for "properties that come from the `ControlCore`, but consumers of the `TermControl` need to know". In the future, these will all need to be handled specially, because they might involve an RPC call to retrieve the info from the core (or cache it) in the window process.
* I've added more `EventArgs` to make more events proper `TypedEvent`s.
* I've changed how the TerminalApp layer requests updated TaskbarProgress state. It doesn't need to pump TermControl to raise a new event anymore.
* ~~Something that snuck into this branch in the very long history is the switch to `DCompositionCreateSurfaceHandle` for the `DxEngine`. @miniksa wrote this originally in 30b8335, I'm just finally committing it here. We'll need that in the future for the out-of-proc stuff.~~
* I reverted this in c113b65d9. We can revert _that_ commit when we want to come back to it.
* I've changed the acrylic handler a decent amount. But added tests!
* All the `ThrottledFunc` things are left in `TermControl`. Some might be able to move down into core/interactivity, but once we figure out how to use a different kind of Dispatcher (because a UI thread won't necessarily exist for those components).
* I've undoubtably messed up the merging of the locking around the appearance config stuff recently
## Validation Steps Performed
I've got a rolling list in https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/issues/6842#issuecomment-810990460 that I'm updating as I go.
2021-04-27 10:50:45 -05:00
|
|
|
TEST_CLASS_PROPERTY(L"TestTimeout", L"0:0:10") // 10s timeout
|
2021-04-05 11:07:55 -05:00
|
|
|
END_TEST_CLASS()
|
|
|
|
|
|
Split `TermControl` into a Core, Interactivity, and Control layer (#9820)
## Summary of the Pull Request
Brace yourselves, it's finally here. This PR does the dirty work of splitting the monolithic `TermControl` into three components. These components are:
* `ControlCore`: This encapsulates the `Terminal` instance, the `DxEngine` and `Renderer`, and the `Connection`. This is intended to everything that someone might need to stand up a terminal instance in a control, but without any regard for how the UX works.
* `ControlInteractivity`: This is a wrapper for the `ControlCore`, which holds the logic for things like double-click, right click copy/paste, selection, etc. This is intended to be a UI framework-independent abstraction. The methods this layer exposes can be called the same from both the WinUI TermControl and the WPF control.
* `TermControl`: This is the UWP control. It's got a Core and Interactivity inside it, which it uses for the actual logic of the terminal itself. TermControl's main responsibility is now
By splitting into smaller pieces, it will enable us to
* write unit tests for the `Core` and `Interactivity` bits, which we desparately need
* Combine `ControlCore` and `ControlInteractivity` in an out-of-proc core process in the future, to enable tab tearout.
However, we're not doing that work quite yet. There's still lots of work to be done to enable that, thought this is likely the biggest portion.
Ideally, this would just be methods moved wholesale from one file to another. Unfortunately, there are a bunch of cases where that didn't work as well as expected. Especially when trying to better enforce the boundary between the classes.
We've got a couple tests here that I've added. These are partially examples, and partially things I ran into while implementing this. A bunch of things from #7001 can go in now that we have this.
This PR is gonna be a huge pain to review - 38 files with 3,730 additions and 1,661 deletions is nothing to scoff at. It will also conflict 100% with anything that's targeting `TermControl`. I'm hoping we can review this over the course of the next week and just be done with it, and leave plenty of runway for 1.9 bugs in post.
## References
* In pursuit of #1256
* Proc Model: #5000
* https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5
## PR Checklist
* [x] Closes #6842
* [x] Closes https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5#card-50760249
* [x] Closes https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5#card-50760258
* [x] I work here
* [x] Tests added/passed
* [n/a] Requires documentation to be updated
## Detailed Description of the Pull Request / Additional comments
* I don't love the names `ControlCore` and `ControlInteractivity`. Open to other names.
* I added a `ICoreState` interface for "properties that come from the `ControlCore`, but consumers of the `TermControl` need to know". In the future, these will all need to be handled specially, because they might involve an RPC call to retrieve the info from the core (or cache it) in the window process.
* I've added more `EventArgs` to make more events proper `TypedEvent`s.
* I've changed how the TerminalApp layer requests updated TaskbarProgress state. It doesn't need to pump TermControl to raise a new event anymore.
* ~~Something that snuck into this branch in the very long history is the switch to `DCompositionCreateSurfaceHandle` for the `DxEngine`. @miniksa wrote this originally in 30b8335, I'm just finally committing it here. We'll need that in the future for the out-of-proc stuff.~~
* I reverted this in c113b65d9. We can revert _that_ commit when we want to come back to it.
* I've changed the acrylic handler a decent amount. But added tests!
* All the `ThrottledFunc` things are left in `TermControl`. Some might be able to move down into core/interactivity, but once we figure out how to use a different kind of Dispatcher (because a UI thread won't necessarily exist for those components).
* I've undoubtably messed up the merging of the locking around the appearance config stuff recently
## Validation Steps Performed
I've got a rolling list in https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/issues/6842#issuecomment-810990460 that I'm updating as I go.
2021-04-27 10:50:45 -05:00
|
|
|
TEST_METHOD(ComPtrSettings);
|
|
|
|
|
TEST_METHOD(InstantiateCore);
|
|
|
|
|
TEST_METHOD(TestInitialize);
|
|
|
|
|
TEST_METHOD(TestAdjustAcrylic);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TEST_METHOD(TestFreeAfterClose);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TEST_METHOD(TestFontInitializedInCtor);
|
|
|
|
|
|
2021-09-02 09:59:42 -05:00
|
|
|
TEST_METHOD(TestClearScrollback);
|
|
|
|
|
TEST_METHOD(TestClearScreen);
|
|
|
|
|
TEST_METHOD(TestClearAll);
|
2022-11-12 23:31:10 +00:00
|
|
|
TEST_METHOD(TestReadEntireBuffer);
|
2021-09-02 09:59:42 -05:00
|
|
|
|
Add the ability to select a whole command (or its output) (#14807)
Adds two new commands, `selectOutput` and `selectCommand`. These don't
do much without shell integration enabled, unfortunately. If you do
enable it, however, you can use these commands to quickly navigate the
history to select whole commands (or their output).
Some sample JSON:
```json
{ "keys": "ctrl+shift+<", "command": { "action": "selectCommand", "direction": "prev" } },
{ "keys": "ctrl+shift+>", "command": { "action": "selectCommand", "direction": "next" } },
{ "keys": "ctrl+shift+[", "command": { "action": "selectOutput", "direction": "prev" } },
{ "keys": "ctrl+shift+]", "command": { "action": "selectOutput", "direction": "next" } },
```
**Demo gifs** in
https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/issues/4588#issuecomment-1352042789
closes #4588
Tested manually.
<details>
<summary>CMD.exe user? It's dangerous to go alone! Take this.</summary>
Surely, there's a simpler way to do it, this is adapted from my own
script.
```cmd
prompt $e]133;D$e\$e]133;A$e\$e\$e]9;9;$P$e\$e[30;107m[$T]$e[97;46m$g$P$e[36;49m$g$e[0m$e[K$_$e[0m$e[94m%username%$e[0m@$e[32m%computername%$e[0m$G$e]133;B$e\
```
</details>
2023-04-20 07:34:58 -05:00
|
|
|
TEST_METHOD(TestSelectCommandSimple);
|
|
|
|
|
TEST_METHOD(TestSelectOutputSimple);
|
2024-05-13 12:36:27 -05:00
|
|
|
TEST_METHOD(TestCommandContext);
|
2024-05-01 10:06:33 -05:00
|
|
|
TEST_METHOD(TestSelectOutputScrolling);
|
|
|
|
|
TEST_METHOD(TestSelectOutputExactWrap);
|
Add the ability to select a whole command (or its output) (#14807)
Adds two new commands, `selectOutput` and `selectCommand`. These don't
do much without shell integration enabled, unfortunately. If you do
enable it, however, you can use these commands to quickly navigate the
history to select whole commands (or their output).
Some sample JSON:
```json
{ "keys": "ctrl+shift+<", "command": { "action": "selectCommand", "direction": "prev" } },
{ "keys": "ctrl+shift+>", "command": { "action": "selectCommand", "direction": "next" } },
{ "keys": "ctrl+shift+[", "command": { "action": "selectOutput", "direction": "prev" } },
{ "keys": "ctrl+shift+]", "command": { "action": "selectOutput", "direction": "next" } },
```
**Demo gifs** in
https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/issues/4588#issuecomment-1352042789
closes #4588
Tested manually.
<details>
<summary>CMD.exe user? It's dangerous to go alone! Take this.</summary>
Surely, there's a simpler way to do it, this is adapted from my own
script.
```cmd
prompt $e]133;D$e\$e]133;A$e\$e\$e]9;9;$P$e\$e[30;107m[$T]$e[97;46m$g$P$e[36;49m$g$e[0m$e[K$_$e[0m$e[94m%username%$e[0m@$e[32m%computername%$e[0m$G$e]133;B$e\
```
</details>
2023-04-20 07:34:58 -05:00
|
|
|
|
2023-08-14 07:37:13 -05:00
|
|
|
TEST_METHOD(TestSimpleClickSelection);
|
|
|
|
|
|
Split `TermControl` into a Core, Interactivity, and Control layer (#9820)
## Summary of the Pull Request
Brace yourselves, it's finally here. This PR does the dirty work of splitting the monolithic `TermControl` into three components. These components are:
* `ControlCore`: This encapsulates the `Terminal` instance, the `DxEngine` and `Renderer`, and the `Connection`. This is intended to everything that someone might need to stand up a terminal instance in a control, but without any regard for how the UX works.
* `ControlInteractivity`: This is a wrapper for the `ControlCore`, which holds the logic for things like double-click, right click copy/paste, selection, etc. This is intended to be a UI framework-independent abstraction. The methods this layer exposes can be called the same from both the WinUI TermControl and the WPF control.
* `TermControl`: This is the UWP control. It's got a Core and Interactivity inside it, which it uses for the actual logic of the terminal itself. TermControl's main responsibility is now
By splitting into smaller pieces, it will enable us to
* write unit tests for the `Core` and `Interactivity` bits, which we desparately need
* Combine `ControlCore` and `ControlInteractivity` in an out-of-proc core process in the future, to enable tab tearout.
However, we're not doing that work quite yet. There's still lots of work to be done to enable that, thought this is likely the biggest portion.
Ideally, this would just be methods moved wholesale from one file to another. Unfortunately, there are a bunch of cases where that didn't work as well as expected. Especially when trying to better enforce the boundary between the classes.
We've got a couple tests here that I've added. These are partially examples, and partially things I ran into while implementing this. A bunch of things from #7001 can go in now that we have this.
This PR is gonna be a huge pain to review - 38 files with 3,730 additions and 1,661 deletions is nothing to scoff at. It will also conflict 100% with anything that's targeting `TermControl`. I'm hoping we can review this over the course of the next week and just be done with it, and leave plenty of runway for 1.9 bugs in post.
## References
* In pursuit of #1256
* Proc Model: #5000
* https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5
## PR Checklist
* [x] Closes #6842
* [x] Closes https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5#card-50760249
* [x] Closes https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5#card-50760258
* [x] I work here
* [x] Tests added/passed
* [n/a] Requires documentation to be updated
## Detailed Description of the Pull Request / Additional comments
* I don't love the names `ControlCore` and `ControlInteractivity`. Open to other names.
* I added a `ICoreState` interface for "properties that come from the `ControlCore`, but consumers of the `TermControl` need to know". In the future, these will all need to be handled specially, because they might involve an RPC call to retrieve the info from the core (or cache it) in the window process.
* I've added more `EventArgs` to make more events proper `TypedEvent`s.
* I've changed how the TerminalApp layer requests updated TaskbarProgress state. It doesn't need to pump TermControl to raise a new event anymore.
* ~~Something that snuck into this branch in the very long history is the switch to `DCompositionCreateSurfaceHandle` for the `DxEngine`. @miniksa wrote this originally in 30b8335, I'm just finally committing it here. We'll need that in the future for the out-of-proc stuff.~~
* I reverted this in c113b65d9. We can revert _that_ commit when we want to come back to it.
* I've changed the acrylic handler a decent amount. But added tests!
* All the `ThrottledFunc` things are left in `TermControl`. Some might be able to move down into core/interactivity, but once we figure out how to use a different kind of Dispatcher (because a UI thread won't necessarily exist for those components).
* I've undoubtably messed up the merging of the locking around the appearance config stuff recently
## Validation Steps Performed
I've got a rolling list in https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/issues/6842#issuecomment-810990460 that I'm updating as I go.
2021-04-27 10:50:45 -05:00
|
|
|
TEST_CLASS_SETUP(ModuleSetup)
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
winrt::init_apartment(winrt::apartment_type::single_threaded);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
return true;
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
TEST_CLASS_CLEANUP(ClassCleanup)
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
winrt::uninit_apartment();
|
|
|
|
|
return true;
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
std::tuple<winrt::com_ptr<MockControlSettings>, winrt::com_ptr<MockConnection>> _createSettingsAndConnection()
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
Log::Comment(L"Create settings object");
|
|
|
|
|
auto settings = winrt::make_self<MockControlSettings>();
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_IS_NOT_NULL(settings);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Log::Comment(L"Create connection object");
|
|
|
|
|
auto conn = winrt::make_self<MockConnection>();
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_IS_NOT_NULL(conn);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
return { settings, conn };
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
Allow `ThrottledFunc` to work on different types of dispatcher (#10187)
#### ⚠️ targets #10051
## Summary of the Pull Request
This updates our `ThrottledFunc`s to take a dispatcher parameter. This means that we can use the `Windows::UI::Core::CoreDispatcher` in the `TermControl`, where there's always a `CoreDispatcher`, and use a `Windows::System::DispatcherQueue` in `ControlCore`/`ControlInteractivity`. When running in-proc, these are always the _same thing_. However, out-of-proc, the core needs a dispatcher queue that's not tied to a UI thread (because the content proces _doesn't have a UI thread!_).
This lets us get rid of the output event, because we don't need to bubble that event out to the `TermControl` to let it throttle that update anymore.
## References
* Tear-out: #1256
* Megathread: #5000
* Project: https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5
## PR Checklist
* [x] This is a part of #1256
* [x] I work here
* [n/a] Tests added/passed
* [n/a] Requires documentation to be updated
## Detailed Description of the Pull Request / Additional comments
Fortunately, `winrt::resume_foreground` works the same on both a `CoreDispatcher` and a `DispatcherQueue`, so this wasn't too hard!
## Validation Steps Performed
This was validated in `dev/migrie/oop/the-whole-thing` (or `dev/migrie/oop/connection-factory`, I forget which), and I made sure that it worked both in-proc and x-proc. Not only that, _it wasn't any slower_!This reverts commit 04b751faa70680bf0296063deacec4657c6ff9d6.
2021-08-09 10:21:59 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
winrt::com_ptr<Control::implementation::ControlCore> createCore(Control::IControlSettings settings,
|
|
|
|
|
TerminalConnection::ITerminalConnection conn)
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
Log::Comment(L"Create ControlCore object");
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change the `ControlCore` layer to own a copy of its settings (#11619)
## Summary of the Pull Request
Currently, the TermControl and ControlCore recieve a settings object that implements `IControlSettings`. They use for this for both reading the settings they should use, and also storing some runtime overrides to those settings (namely, `Opacity`). The object they recieve currently is a `T.S.M.TerminalSettings` object, as well as another `TerminalSettings` object if the user wants to have an `unfocusedAppearance`. All these are all hosted in the same process, so everything is fine and dandy.
With the upcoming move to having the Terminal split into multiple processes, this will no longer work. If the `ControlCore` in the Content Process is given a pointer to a `TerminalSettings` in a certain Window Process, and that control is subsequently moved to another window, then there's no guarantee that the original `TerminalSettings` object continues to exist. In this scenario, when window 1 is closed, now the Core is unable to read any settings, because the process that owned that object no longer exists.
The solution to this issue is to have the `ControlCore`'s own their own copy of the settings they were created with. that way, they can be confident those settings will always exist. Enter `ControlSettings`, a dumb struct for just storing all the contents of the Settings. I used x-macros for this, so that we don't need to copy-paste into this file every time we add a setting.
Changing this has all sorts of other fallout effects:
* Previewing a scheme/anything is a tad bit more annoying. Before, we could just sneak the previewed scheme into a `TerminalSettings` that lived between the settings we created the control with, and the settings they were actually using, and it would _just work_. Even explaining that here, it sounds like magic, because it was. However, now, the TermControl can't use a layered `TerminalSettings` for the settings anymore. Now we need to actually read out the current color table, and set the whole scheme when we change it. So now there's also a `Microsoft.Terminal.Core.Scheme` _struct_ for holding that data.
- Why a `struct`? Because that will go across the process boundary as a blob, rather than as a pointer to an object in the other process. That way we can transit the whole struct from window to core safely.
* A TermControl doesn't have a `IControlSettings` at all anymore - it initalizes itself via the settings in the `Core`. This will be useful for tear-out, when we need to have the `TermControl` initialize itself from just a `ControlCore`, without being able to rebuild the settings from scratch.
* The `TabTests` that were written under the assumption that the Control had a layered `TerminalSettings` obviously broke, as they were designed to. They've been modified to reflect the new reality.
* When we initialize the Control, we give it the settings and the `UnfocusedAppearance` all at once. If we don't give it an `unfocusedAppearance`, it will just use the focused appearance as the unfocused appearance.
* The Control no longer can _write_ settings to the `ControlSettings`. We don't want to be storing things in there. Pretty much everything we set in the control, we store somewhere other than in the settings object itself. However, `opacity` and `useAcrylic`, we need to store in a handy new `RUNTIME_SETTING` property. We can write those runtime overrides to those properties.
* We no longer store the color scheme for a pane in the persisted state. I'm tracking that in #9800. I don't think it's too hard to add back, but I wanted this in front of eyes sooner than later.
## References
* #1256
* #5000
* #9794 has the scheme previewing in it.
* #9818 is WAY more possible now.
## PR Checklist
* [x] Surprisingly there wasn't ever a card or issue for this one. This was only ever a bullet point in #5000.
* A bunch of these issues were fixed along the way, though I never intended to fix them:
* [x] Closes #11571
* [x] Closes #11586
* [x] Closes #7219
* [x] Closes #11067
* [x] I think #11623 actually ended up resolving this one, but I'm double tapping on it here: Closes #5703
* [x] I work here
* [x] Tests added/passed
* [n/a] Requires documentation to be updated
## Detailed Description of the Pull Request / Additional comments
Along the way I tried to clean up code where possible, but not too agressively.
I didn't end up converting the various `MockTerminalSettings` classes used in tests to the x macros quite yet. I wanted to merge this with #11416 in `main` before I went too crazy.
## Validation Steps Performed
* [x] Scheme previewing works
* [x] Adjusting the font size works
* [x] focused/unfocused appearances still work
* [x] mouse-wheeling opacity still works
* [x] acrylic & cleartype still does the right thing
* [x] saving the settings still works
* [x] going wild on sliding the opacity slider in the settings doesn't crash the terminal
* [x] toggling retro effects with a keybinding still works
* [x] toggling retro effects with the command palette works
* [x] The matrix of (`useAcrylic(true,false)`)x(`opacity(50,100)`)x(`antialiasingMode(cleartype, grayscale)`) works as expected. Slightly changed, falls back to grayscale more often, but looks more right.
2021-12-01 13:33:51 -06:00
|
|
|
auto core = winrt::make_self<Control::implementation::ControlCore>(settings, settings, conn);
|
Allow `ThrottledFunc` to work on different types of dispatcher (#10187)
#### ⚠️ targets #10051
## Summary of the Pull Request
This updates our `ThrottledFunc`s to take a dispatcher parameter. This means that we can use the `Windows::UI::Core::CoreDispatcher` in the `TermControl`, where there's always a `CoreDispatcher`, and use a `Windows::System::DispatcherQueue` in `ControlCore`/`ControlInteractivity`. When running in-proc, these are always the _same thing_. However, out-of-proc, the core needs a dispatcher queue that's not tied to a UI thread (because the content proces _doesn't have a UI thread!_).
This lets us get rid of the output event, because we don't need to bubble that event out to the `TermControl` to let it throttle that update anymore.
## References
* Tear-out: #1256
* Megathread: #5000
* Project: https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5
## PR Checklist
* [x] This is a part of #1256
* [x] I work here
* [n/a] Tests added/passed
* [n/a] Requires documentation to be updated
## Detailed Description of the Pull Request / Additional comments
Fortunately, `winrt::resume_foreground` works the same on both a `CoreDispatcher` and a `DispatcherQueue`, so this wasn't too hard!
## Validation Steps Performed
This was validated in `dev/migrie/oop/the-whole-thing` (or `dev/migrie/oop/connection-factory`, I forget which), and I made sure that it worked both in-proc and x-proc. Not only that, _it wasn't any slower_!This reverts commit 04b751faa70680bf0296063deacec4657c6ff9d6.
2021-08-09 10:21:59 -05:00
|
|
|
core->_inUnitTests = true;
|
|
|
|
|
return core;
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
2021-09-02 09:59:42 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
void _standardInit(winrt::com_ptr<Control::implementation::ControlCore> core)
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
2023-12-04 21:29:34 +01:00
|
|
|
// "Consolas" ends up with an actual size of 9x19 at 96DPI. So
|
|
|
|
|
// let's just arbitrarily start with a 270x380px (30x20 chars) window
|
|
|
|
|
core->Initialize(270, 380, 1.0);
|
|
|
|
|
#ifndef NDEBUG
|
|
|
|
|
core->_terminal->_suppressLockChecks = true;
|
|
|
|
|
#endif
|
2021-09-02 09:59:42 -05:00
|
|
|
VERIFY_IS_TRUE(core->_initializedTerminal);
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(20, core->_terminal->GetViewport().Height());
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
2021-04-05 11:07:55 -05:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
Split `TermControl` into a Core, Interactivity, and Control layer (#9820)
## Summary of the Pull Request
Brace yourselves, it's finally here. This PR does the dirty work of splitting the monolithic `TermControl` into three components. These components are:
* `ControlCore`: This encapsulates the `Terminal` instance, the `DxEngine` and `Renderer`, and the `Connection`. This is intended to everything that someone might need to stand up a terminal instance in a control, but without any regard for how the UX works.
* `ControlInteractivity`: This is a wrapper for the `ControlCore`, which holds the logic for things like double-click, right click copy/paste, selection, etc. This is intended to be a UI framework-independent abstraction. The methods this layer exposes can be called the same from both the WinUI TermControl and the WPF control.
* `TermControl`: This is the UWP control. It's got a Core and Interactivity inside it, which it uses for the actual logic of the terminal itself. TermControl's main responsibility is now
By splitting into smaller pieces, it will enable us to
* write unit tests for the `Core` and `Interactivity` bits, which we desparately need
* Combine `ControlCore` and `ControlInteractivity` in an out-of-proc core process in the future, to enable tab tearout.
However, we're not doing that work quite yet. There's still lots of work to be done to enable that, thought this is likely the biggest portion.
Ideally, this would just be methods moved wholesale from one file to another. Unfortunately, there are a bunch of cases where that didn't work as well as expected. Especially when trying to better enforce the boundary between the classes.
We've got a couple tests here that I've added. These are partially examples, and partially things I ran into while implementing this. A bunch of things from #7001 can go in now that we have this.
This PR is gonna be a huge pain to review - 38 files with 3,730 additions and 1,661 deletions is nothing to scoff at. It will also conflict 100% with anything that's targeting `TermControl`. I'm hoping we can review this over the course of the next week and just be done with it, and leave plenty of runway for 1.9 bugs in post.
## References
* In pursuit of #1256
* Proc Model: #5000
* https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5
## PR Checklist
* [x] Closes #6842
* [x] Closes https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5#card-50760249
* [x] Closes https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5#card-50760258
* [x] I work here
* [x] Tests added/passed
* [n/a] Requires documentation to be updated
## Detailed Description of the Pull Request / Additional comments
* I don't love the names `ControlCore` and `ControlInteractivity`. Open to other names.
* I added a `ICoreState` interface for "properties that come from the `ControlCore`, but consumers of the `TermControl` need to know". In the future, these will all need to be handled specially, because they might involve an RPC call to retrieve the info from the core (or cache it) in the window process.
* I've added more `EventArgs` to make more events proper `TypedEvent`s.
* I've changed how the TerminalApp layer requests updated TaskbarProgress state. It doesn't need to pump TermControl to raise a new event anymore.
* ~~Something that snuck into this branch in the very long history is the switch to `DCompositionCreateSurfaceHandle` for the `DxEngine`. @miniksa wrote this originally in 30b8335, I'm just finally committing it here. We'll need that in the future for the out-of-proc stuff.~~
* I reverted this in c113b65d9. We can revert _that_ commit when we want to come back to it.
* I've changed the acrylic handler a decent amount. But added tests!
* All the `ThrottledFunc` things are left in `TermControl`. Some might be able to move down into core/interactivity, but once we figure out how to use a different kind of Dispatcher (because a UI thread won't necessarily exist for those components).
* I've undoubtably messed up the merging of the locking around the appearance config stuff recently
## Validation Steps Performed
I've got a rolling list in https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/issues/6842#issuecomment-810990460 that I'm updating as I go.
2021-04-27 10:50:45 -05:00
|
|
|
void ControlCoreTests::ComPtrSettings()
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
Log::Comment(L"Just make sure we can instantiate a settings obj in a com_ptr");
|
|
|
|
|
auto settings = winrt::make_self<MockControlSettings>();
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Log::Comment(L"Verify literally any setting, it doesn't matter");
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(DEFAULT_FOREGROUND, settings->DefaultForeground());
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
void ControlCoreTests::InstantiateCore()
|
2021-04-05 11:07:55 -05:00
|
|
|
{
|
Split `TermControl` into a Core, Interactivity, and Control layer (#9820)
## Summary of the Pull Request
Brace yourselves, it's finally here. This PR does the dirty work of splitting the monolithic `TermControl` into three components. These components are:
* `ControlCore`: This encapsulates the `Terminal` instance, the `DxEngine` and `Renderer`, and the `Connection`. This is intended to everything that someone might need to stand up a terminal instance in a control, but without any regard for how the UX works.
* `ControlInteractivity`: This is a wrapper for the `ControlCore`, which holds the logic for things like double-click, right click copy/paste, selection, etc. This is intended to be a UI framework-independent abstraction. The methods this layer exposes can be called the same from both the WinUI TermControl and the WPF control.
* `TermControl`: This is the UWP control. It's got a Core and Interactivity inside it, which it uses for the actual logic of the terminal itself. TermControl's main responsibility is now
By splitting into smaller pieces, it will enable us to
* write unit tests for the `Core` and `Interactivity` bits, which we desparately need
* Combine `ControlCore` and `ControlInteractivity` in an out-of-proc core process in the future, to enable tab tearout.
However, we're not doing that work quite yet. There's still lots of work to be done to enable that, thought this is likely the biggest portion.
Ideally, this would just be methods moved wholesale from one file to another. Unfortunately, there are a bunch of cases where that didn't work as well as expected. Especially when trying to better enforce the boundary between the classes.
We've got a couple tests here that I've added. These are partially examples, and partially things I ran into while implementing this. A bunch of things from #7001 can go in now that we have this.
This PR is gonna be a huge pain to review - 38 files with 3,730 additions and 1,661 deletions is nothing to scoff at. It will also conflict 100% with anything that's targeting `TermControl`. I'm hoping we can review this over the course of the next week and just be done with it, and leave plenty of runway for 1.9 bugs in post.
## References
* In pursuit of #1256
* Proc Model: #5000
* https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5
## PR Checklist
* [x] Closes #6842
* [x] Closes https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5#card-50760249
* [x] Closes https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5#card-50760258
* [x] I work here
* [x] Tests added/passed
* [n/a] Requires documentation to be updated
## Detailed Description of the Pull Request / Additional comments
* I don't love the names `ControlCore` and `ControlInteractivity`. Open to other names.
* I added a `ICoreState` interface for "properties that come from the `ControlCore`, but consumers of the `TermControl` need to know". In the future, these will all need to be handled specially, because they might involve an RPC call to retrieve the info from the core (or cache it) in the window process.
* I've added more `EventArgs` to make more events proper `TypedEvent`s.
* I've changed how the TerminalApp layer requests updated TaskbarProgress state. It doesn't need to pump TermControl to raise a new event anymore.
* ~~Something that snuck into this branch in the very long history is the switch to `DCompositionCreateSurfaceHandle` for the `DxEngine`. @miniksa wrote this originally in 30b8335, I'm just finally committing it here. We'll need that in the future for the out-of-proc stuff.~~
* I reverted this in c113b65d9. We can revert _that_ commit when we want to come back to it.
* I've changed the acrylic handler a decent amount. But added tests!
* All the `ThrottledFunc` things are left in `TermControl`. Some might be able to move down into core/interactivity, but once we figure out how to use a different kind of Dispatcher (because a UI thread won't necessarily exist for those components).
* I've undoubtably messed up the merging of the locking around the appearance config stuff recently
## Validation Steps Performed
I've got a rolling list in https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/issues/6842#issuecomment-810990460 that I'm updating as I go.
2021-04-27 10:50:45 -05:00
|
|
|
auto [settings, conn] = _createSettingsAndConnection();
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allow `ThrottledFunc` to work on different types of dispatcher (#10187)
#### ⚠️ targets #10051
## Summary of the Pull Request
This updates our `ThrottledFunc`s to take a dispatcher parameter. This means that we can use the `Windows::UI::Core::CoreDispatcher` in the `TermControl`, where there's always a `CoreDispatcher`, and use a `Windows::System::DispatcherQueue` in `ControlCore`/`ControlInteractivity`. When running in-proc, these are always the _same thing_. However, out-of-proc, the core needs a dispatcher queue that's not tied to a UI thread (because the content proces _doesn't have a UI thread!_).
This lets us get rid of the output event, because we don't need to bubble that event out to the `TermControl` to let it throttle that update anymore.
## References
* Tear-out: #1256
* Megathread: #5000
* Project: https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5
## PR Checklist
* [x] This is a part of #1256
* [x] I work here
* [n/a] Tests added/passed
* [n/a] Requires documentation to be updated
## Detailed Description of the Pull Request / Additional comments
Fortunately, `winrt::resume_foreground` works the same on both a `CoreDispatcher` and a `DispatcherQueue`, so this wasn't too hard!
## Validation Steps Performed
This was validated in `dev/migrie/oop/the-whole-thing` (or `dev/migrie/oop/connection-factory`, I forget which), and I made sure that it worked both in-proc and x-proc. Not only that, _it wasn't any slower_!This reverts commit 04b751faa70680bf0296063deacec4657c6ff9d6.
2021-08-09 10:21:59 -05:00
|
|
|
auto core = createCore(*settings, *conn);
|
Split `TermControl` into a Core, Interactivity, and Control layer (#9820)
## Summary of the Pull Request
Brace yourselves, it's finally here. This PR does the dirty work of splitting the monolithic `TermControl` into three components. These components are:
* `ControlCore`: This encapsulates the `Terminal` instance, the `DxEngine` and `Renderer`, and the `Connection`. This is intended to everything that someone might need to stand up a terminal instance in a control, but without any regard for how the UX works.
* `ControlInteractivity`: This is a wrapper for the `ControlCore`, which holds the logic for things like double-click, right click copy/paste, selection, etc. This is intended to be a UI framework-independent abstraction. The methods this layer exposes can be called the same from both the WinUI TermControl and the WPF control.
* `TermControl`: This is the UWP control. It's got a Core and Interactivity inside it, which it uses for the actual logic of the terminal itself. TermControl's main responsibility is now
By splitting into smaller pieces, it will enable us to
* write unit tests for the `Core` and `Interactivity` bits, which we desparately need
* Combine `ControlCore` and `ControlInteractivity` in an out-of-proc core process in the future, to enable tab tearout.
However, we're not doing that work quite yet. There's still lots of work to be done to enable that, thought this is likely the biggest portion.
Ideally, this would just be methods moved wholesale from one file to another. Unfortunately, there are a bunch of cases where that didn't work as well as expected. Especially when trying to better enforce the boundary between the classes.
We've got a couple tests here that I've added. These are partially examples, and partially things I ran into while implementing this. A bunch of things from #7001 can go in now that we have this.
This PR is gonna be a huge pain to review - 38 files with 3,730 additions and 1,661 deletions is nothing to scoff at. It will also conflict 100% with anything that's targeting `TermControl`. I'm hoping we can review this over the course of the next week and just be done with it, and leave plenty of runway for 1.9 bugs in post.
## References
* In pursuit of #1256
* Proc Model: #5000
* https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5
## PR Checklist
* [x] Closes #6842
* [x] Closes https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5#card-50760249
* [x] Closes https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5#card-50760258
* [x] I work here
* [x] Tests added/passed
* [n/a] Requires documentation to be updated
## Detailed Description of the Pull Request / Additional comments
* I don't love the names `ControlCore` and `ControlInteractivity`. Open to other names.
* I added a `ICoreState` interface for "properties that come from the `ControlCore`, but consumers of the `TermControl` need to know". In the future, these will all need to be handled specially, because they might involve an RPC call to retrieve the info from the core (or cache it) in the window process.
* I've added more `EventArgs` to make more events proper `TypedEvent`s.
* I've changed how the TerminalApp layer requests updated TaskbarProgress state. It doesn't need to pump TermControl to raise a new event anymore.
* ~~Something that snuck into this branch in the very long history is the switch to `DCompositionCreateSurfaceHandle` for the `DxEngine`. @miniksa wrote this originally in 30b8335, I'm just finally committing it here. We'll need that in the future for the out-of-proc stuff.~~
* I reverted this in c113b65d9. We can revert _that_ commit when we want to come back to it.
* I've changed the acrylic handler a decent amount. But added tests!
* All the `ThrottledFunc` things are left in `TermControl`. Some might be able to move down into core/interactivity, but once we figure out how to use a different kind of Dispatcher (because a UI thread won't necessarily exist for those components).
* I've undoubtably messed up the merging of the locking around the appearance config stuff recently
## Validation Steps Performed
I've got a rolling list in https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/issues/6842#issuecomment-810990460 that I'm updating as I go.
2021-04-27 10:50:45 -05:00
|
|
|
VERIFY_IS_NOT_NULL(core);
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
void ControlCoreTests::TestInitialize()
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
auto [settings, conn] = _createSettingsAndConnection();
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allow `ThrottledFunc` to work on different types of dispatcher (#10187)
#### ⚠️ targets #10051
## Summary of the Pull Request
This updates our `ThrottledFunc`s to take a dispatcher parameter. This means that we can use the `Windows::UI::Core::CoreDispatcher` in the `TermControl`, where there's always a `CoreDispatcher`, and use a `Windows::System::DispatcherQueue` in `ControlCore`/`ControlInteractivity`. When running in-proc, these are always the _same thing_. However, out-of-proc, the core needs a dispatcher queue that's not tied to a UI thread (because the content proces _doesn't have a UI thread!_).
This lets us get rid of the output event, because we don't need to bubble that event out to the `TermControl` to let it throttle that update anymore.
## References
* Tear-out: #1256
* Megathread: #5000
* Project: https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5
## PR Checklist
* [x] This is a part of #1256
* [x] I work here
* [n/a] Tests added/passed
* [n/a] Requires documentation to be updated
## Detailed Description of the Pull Request / Additional comments
Fortunately, `winrt::resume_foreground` works the same on both a `CoreDispatcher` and a `DispatcherQueue`, so this wasn't too hard!
## Validation Steps Performed
This was validated in `dev/migrie/oop/the-whole-thing` (or `dev/migrie/oop/connection-factory`, I forget which), and I made sure that it worked both in-proc and x-proc. Not only that, _it wasn't any slower_!This reverts commit 04b751faa70680bf0296063deacec4657c6ff9d6.
2021-08-09 10:21:59 -05:00
|
|
|
auto core = createCore(*settings, *conn);
|
Split `TermControl` into a Core, Interactivity, and Control layer (#9820)
## Summary of the Pull Request
Brace yourselves, it's finally here. This PR does the dirty work of splitting the monolithic `TermControl` into three components. These components are:
* `ControlCore`: This encapsulates the `Terminal` instance, the `DxEngine` and `Renderer`, and the `Connection`. This is intended to everything that someone might need to stand up a terminal instance in a control, but without any regard for how the UX works.
* `ControlInteractivity`: This is a wrapper for the `ControlCore`, which holds the logic for things like double-click, right click copy/paste, selection, etc. This is intended to be a UI framework-independent abstraction. The methods this layer exposes can be called the same from both the WinUI TermControl and the WPF control.
* `TermControl`: This is the UWP control. It's got a Core and Interactivity inside it, which it uses for the actual logic of the terminal itself. TermControl's main responsibility is now
By splitting into smaller pieces, it will enable us to
* write unit tests for the `Core` and `Interactivity` bits, which we desparately need
* Combine `ControlCore` and `ControlInteractivity` in an out-of-proc core process in the future, to enable tab tearout.
However, we're not doing that work quite yet. There's still lots of work to be done to enable that, thought this is likely the biggest portion.
Ideally, this would just be methods moved wholesale from one file to another. Unfortunately, there are a bunch of cases where that didn't work as well as expected. Especially when trying to better enforce the boundary between the classes.
We've got a couple tests here that I've added. These are partially examples, and partially things I ran into while implementing this. A bunch of things from #7001 can go in now that we have this.
This PR is gonna be a huge pain to review - 38 files with 3,730 additions and 1,661 deletions is nothing to scoff at. It will also conflict 100% with anything that's targeting `TermControl`. I'm hoping we can review this over the course of the next week and just be done with it, and leave plenty of runway for 1.9 bugs in post.
## References
* In pursuit of #1256
* Proc Model: #5000
* https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5
## PR Checklist
* [x] Closes #6842
* [x] Closes https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5#card-50760249
* [x] Closes https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5#card-50760258
* [x] I work here
* [x] Tests added/passed
* [n/a] Requires documentation to be updated
## Detailed Description of the Pull Request / Additional comments
* I don't love the names `ControlCore` and `ControlInteractivity`. Open to other names.
* I added a `ICoreState` interface for "properties that come from the `ControlCore`, but consumers of the `TermControl` need to know". In the future, these will all need to be handled specially, because they might involve an RPC call to retrieve the info from the core (or cache it) in the window process.
* I've added more `EventArgs` to make more events proper `TypedEvent`s.
* I've changed how the TerminalApp layer requests updated TaskbarProgress state. It doesn't need to pump TermControl to raise a new event anymore.
* ~~Something that snuck into this branch in the very long history is the switch to `DCompositionCreateSurfaceHandle` for the `DxEngine`. @miniksa wrote this originally in 30b8335, I'm just finally committing it here. We'll need that in the future for the out-of-proc stuff.~~
* I reverted this in c113b65d9. We can revert _that_ commit when we want to come back to it.
* I've changed the acrylic handler a decent amount. But added tests!
* All the `ThrottledFunc` things are left in `TermControl`. Some might be able to move down into core/interactivity, but once we figure out how to use a different kind of Dispatcher (because a UI thread won't necessarily exist for those components).
* I've undoubtably messed up the merging of the locking around the appearance config stuff recently
## Validation Steps Performed
I've got a rolling list in https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/issues/6842#issuecomment-810990460 that I'm updating as I go.
2021-04-27 10:50:45 -05:00
|
|
|
VERIFY_IS_NOT_NULL(core);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_IS_FALSE(core->_initializedTerminal);
|
2023-12-04 21:29:34 +01:00
|
|
|
// "Consolas" ends up with an actual size of 9x19 at 96DPI. So
|
|
|
|
|
// let's just arbitrarily start with a 270x380px (30x20 chars) window
|
|
|
|
|
core->Initialize(270, 380, 1.0);
|
|
|
|
|
#ifndef NDEBUG
|
|
|
|
|
core->_terminal->_suppressLockChecks = true;
|
|
|
|
|
#endif
|
Split `TermControl` into a Core, Interactivity, and Control layer (#9820)
## Summary of the Pull Request
Brace yourselves, it's finally here. This PR does the dirty work of splitting the monolithic `TermControl` into three components. These components are:
* `ControlCore`: This encapsulates the `Terminal` instance, the `DxEngine` and `Renderer`, and the `Connection`. This is intended to everything that someone might need to stand up a terminal instance in a control, but without any regard for how the UX works.
* `ControlInteractivity`: This is a wrapper for the `ControlCore`, which holds the logic for things like double-click, right click copy/paste, selection, etc. This is intended to be a UI framework-independent abstraction. The methods this layer exposes can be called the same from both the WinUI TermControl and the WPF control.
* `TermControl`: This is the UWP control. It's got a Core and Interactivity inside it, which it uses for the actual logic of the terminal itself. TermControl's main responsibility is now
By splitting into smaller pieces, it will enable us to
* write unit tests for the `Core` and `Interactivity` bits, which we desparately need
* Combine `ControlCore` and `ControlInteractivity` in an out-of-proc core process in the future, to enable tab tearout.
However, we're not doing that work quite yet. There's still lots of work to be done to enable that, thought this is likely the biggest portion.
Ideally, this would just be methods moved wholesale from one file to another. Unfortunately, there are a bunch of cases where that didn't work as well as expected. Especially when trying to better enforce the boundary between the classes.
We've got a couple tests here that I've added. These are partially examples, and partially things I ran into while implementing this. A bunch of things from #7001 can go in now that we have this.
This PR is gonna be a huge pain to review - 38 files with 3,730 additions and 1,661 deletions is nothing to scoff at. It will also conflict 100% with anything that's targeting `TermControl`. I'm hoping we can review this over the course of the next week and just be done with it, and leave plenty of runway for 1.9 bugs in post.
## References
* In pursuit of #1256
* Proc Model: #5000
* https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5
## PR Checklist
* [x] Closes #6842
* [x] Closes https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5#card-50760249
* [x] Closes https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5#card-50760258
* [x] I work here
* [x] Tests added/passed
* [n/a] Requires documentation to be updated
## Detailed Description of the Pull Request / Additional comments
* I don't love the names `ControlCore` and `ControlInteractivity`. Open to other names.
* I added a `ICoreState` interface for "properties that come from the `ControlCore`, but consumers of the `TermControl` need to know". In the future, these will all need to be handled specially, because they might involve an RPC call to retrieve the info from the core (or cache it) in the window process.
* I've added more `EventArgs` to make more events proper `TypedEvent`s.
* I've changed how the TerminalApp layer requests updated TaskbarProgress state. It doesn't need to pump TermControl to raise a new event anymore.
* ~~Something that snuck into this branch in the very long history is the switch to `DCompositionCreateSurfaceHandle` for the `DxEngine`. @miniksa wrote this originally in 30b8335, I'm just finally committing it here. We'll need that in the future for the out-of-proc stuff.~~
* I reverted this in c113b65d9. We can revert _that_ commit when we want to come back to it.
* I've changed the acrylic handler a decent amount. But added tests!
* All the `ThrottledFunc` things are left in `TermControl`. Some might be able to move down into core/interactivity, but once we figure out how to use a different kind of Dispatcher (because a UI thread won't necessarily exist for those components).
* I've undoubtably messed up the merging of the locking around the appearance config stuff recently
## Validation Steps Performed
I've got a rolling list in https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/issues/6842#issuecomment-810990460 that I'm updating as I go.
2021-04-27 10:50:45 -05:00
|
|
|
VERIFY_IS_TRUE(core->_initializedTerminal);
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(30, core->_terminal->GetViewport().Width());
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
void ControlCoreTests::TestAdjustAcrylic()
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
auto [settings, conn] = _createSettingsAndConnection();
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
settings->UseAcrylic(true);
|
2021-09-20 12:08:13 -05:00
|
|
|
settings->Opacity(0.5f);
|
Split `TermControl` into a Core, Interactivity, and Control layer (#9820)
## Summary of the Pull Request
Brace yourselves, it's finally here. This PR does the dirty work of splitting the monolithic `TermControl` into three components. These components are:
* `ControlCore`: This encapsulates the `Terminal` instance, the `DxEngine` and `Renderer`, and the `Connection`. This is intended to everything that someone might need to stand up a terminal instance in a control, but without any regard for how the UX works.
* `ControlInteractivity`: This is a wrapper for the `ControlCore`, which holds the logic for things like double-click, right click copy/paste, selection, etc. This is intended to be a UI framework-independent abstraction. The methods this layer exposes can be called the same from both the WinUI TermControl and the WPF control.
* `TermControl`: This is the UWP control. It's got a Core and Interactivity inside it, which it uses for the actual logic of the terminal itself. TermControl's main responsibility is now
By splitting into smaller pieces, it will enable us to
* write unit tests for the `Core` and `Interactivity` bits, which we desparately need
* Combine `ControlCore` and `ControlInteractivity` in an out-of-proc core process in the future, to enable tab tearout.
However, we're not doing that work quite yet. There's still lots of work to be done to enable that, thought this is likely the biggest portion.
Ideally, this would just be methods moved wholesale from one file to another. Unfortunately, there are a bunch of cases where that didn't work as well as expected. Especially when trying to better enforce the boundary between the classes.
We've got a couple tests here that I've added. These are partially examples, and partially things I ran into while implementing this. A bunch of things from #7001 can go in now that we have this.
This PR is gonna be a huge pain to review - 38 files with 3,730 additions and 1,661 deletions is nothing to scoff at. It will also conflict 100% with anything that's targeting `TermControl`. I'm hoping we can review this over the course of the next week and just be done with it, and leave plenty of runway for 1.9 bugs in post.
## References
* In pursuit of #1256
* Proc Model: #5000
* https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5
## PR Checklist
* [x] Closes #6842
* [x] Closes https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5#card-50760249
* [x] Closes https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5#card-50760258
* [x] I work here
* [x] Tests added/passed
* [n/a] Requires documentation to be updated
## Detailed Description of the Pull Request / Additional comments
* I don't love the names `ControlCore` and `ControlInteractivity`. Open to other names.
* I added a `ICoreState` interface for "properties that come from the `ControlCore`, but consumers of the `TermControl` need to know". In the future, these will all need to be handled specially, because they might involve an RPC call to retrieve the info from the core (or cache it) in the window process.
* I've added more `EventArgs` to make more events proper `TypedEvent`s.
* I've changed how the TerminalApp layer requests updated TaskbarProgress state. It doesn't need to pump TermControl to raise a new event anymore.
* ~~Something that snuck into this branch in the very long history is the switch to `DCompositionCreateSurfaceHandle` for the `DxEngine`. @miniksa wrote this originally in 30b8335, I'm just finally committing it here. We'll need that in the future for the out-of-proc stuff.~~
* I reverted this in c113b65d9. We can revert _that_ commit when we want to come back to it.
* I've changed the acrylic handler a decent amount. But added tests!
* All the `ThrottledFunc` things are left in `TermControl`. Some might be able to move down into core/interactivity, but once we figure out how to use a different kind of Dispatcher (because a UI thread won't necessarily exist for those components).
* I've undoubtably messed up the merging of the locking around the appearance config stuff recently
## Validation Steps Performed
I've got a rolling list in https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/issues/6842#issuecomment-810990460 that I'm updating as I go.
2021-04-27 10:50:45 -05:00
|
|
|
|
Allow `ThrottledFunc` to work on different types of dispatcher (#10187)
#### ⚠️ targets #10051
## Summary of the Pull Request
This updates our `ThrottledFunc`s to take a dispatcher parameter. This means that we can use the `Windows::UI::Core::CoreDispatcher` in the `TermControl`, where there's always a `CoreDispatcher`, and use a `Windows::System::DispatcherQueue` in `ControlCore`/`ControlInteractivity`. When running in-proc, these are always the _same thing_. However, out-of-proc, the core needs a dispatcher queue that's not tied to a UI thread (because the content proces _doesn't have a UI thread!_).
This lets us get rid of the output event, because we don't need to bubble that event out to the `TermControl` to let it throttle that update anymore.
## References
* Tear-out: #1256
* Megathread: #5000
* Project: https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5
## PR Checklist
* [x] This is a part of #1256
* [x] I work here
* [n/a] Tests added/passed
* [n/a] Requires documentation to be updated
## Detailed Description of the Pull Request / Additional comments
Fortunately, `winrt::resume_foreground` works the same on both a `CoreDispatcher` and a `DispatcherQueue`, so this wasn't too hard!
## Validation Steps Performed
This was validated in `dev/migrie/oop/the-whole-thing` (or `dev/migrie/oop/connection-factory`, I forget which), and I made sure that it worked both in-proc and x-proc. Not only that, _it wasn't any slower_!This reverts commit 04b751faa70680bf0296063deacec4657c6ff9d6.
2021-08-09 10:21:59 -05:00
|
|
|
auto core = createCore(*settings, *conn);
|
Split `TermControl` into a Core, Interactivity, and Control layer (#9820)
## Summary of the Pull Request
Brace yourselves, it's finally here. This PR does the dirty work of splitting the monolithic `TermControl` into three components. These components are:
* `ControlCore`: This encapsulates the `Terminal` instance, the `DxEngine` and `Renderer`, and the `Connection`. This is intended to everything that someone might need to stand up a terminal instance in a control, but without any regard for how the UX works.
* `ControlInteractivity`: This is a wrapper for the `ControlCore`, which holds the logic for things like double-click, right click copy/paste, selection, etc. This is intended to be a UI framework-independent abstraction. The methods this layer exposes can be called the same from both the WinUI TermControl and the WPF control.
* `TermControl`: This is the UWP control. It's got a Core and Interactivity inside it, which it uses for the actual logic of the terminal itself. TermControl's main responsibility is now
By splitting into smaller pieces, it will enable us to
* write unit tests for the `Core` and `Interactivity` bits, which we desparately need
* Combine `ControlCore` and `ControlInteractivity` in an out-of-proc core process in the future, to enable tab tearout.
However, we're not doing that work quite yet. There's still lots of work to be done to enable that, thought this is likely the biggest portion.
Ideally, this would just be methods moved wholesale from one file to another. Unfortunately, there are a bunch of cases where that didn't work as well as expected. Especially when trying to better enforce the boundary between the classes.
We've got a couple tests here that I've added. These are partially examples, and partially things I ran into while implementing this. A bunch of things from #7001 can go in now that we have this.
This PR is gonna be a huge pain to review - 38 files with 3,730 additions and 1,661 deletions is nothing to scoff at. It will also conflict 100% with anything that's targeting `TermControl`. I'm hoping we can review this over the course of the next week and just be done with it, and leave plenty of runway for 1.9 bugs in post.
## References
* In pursuit of #1256
* Proc Model: #5000
* https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5
## PR Checklist
* [x] Closes #6842
* [x] Closes https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5#card-50760249
* [x] Closes https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5#card-50760258
* [x] I work here
* [x] Tests added/passed
* [n/a] Requires documentation to be updated
## Detailed Description of the Pull Request / Additional comments
* I don't love the names `ControlCore` and `ControlInteractivity`. Open to other names.
* I added a `ICoreState` interface for "properties that come from the `ControlCore`, but consumers of the `TermControl` need to know". In the future, these will all need to be handled specially, because they might involve an RPC call to retrieve the info from the core (or cache it) in the window process.
* I've added more `EventArgs` to make more events proper `TypedEvent`s.
* I've changed how the TerminalApp layer requests updated TaskbarProgress state. It doesn't need to pump TermControl to raise a new event anymore.
* ~~Something that snuck into this branch in the very long history is the switch to `DCompositionCreateSurfaceHandle` for the `DxEngine`. @miniksa wrote this originally in 30b8335, I'm just finally committing it here. We'll need that in the future for the out-of-proc stuff.~~
* I reverted this in c113b65d9. We can revert _that_ commit when we want to come back to it.
* I've changed the acrylic handler a decent amount. But added tests!
* All the `ThrottledFunc` things are left in `TermControl`. Some might be able to move down into core/interactivity, but once we figure out how to use a different kind of Dispatcher (because a UI thread won't necessarily exist for those components).
* I've undoubtably messed up the merging of the locking around the appearance config stuff recently
## Validation Steps Performed
I've got a rolling list in https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/issues/6842#issuecomment-810990460 that I'm updating as I go.
2021-04-27 10:50:45 -05:00
|
|
|
VERIFY_IS_NOT_NULL(core);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// A callback to make sure that we're raising TransparencyChanged events
|
2024-04-23 02:07:00 +02:00
|
|
|
auto expectedOpacity = 0.5f;
|
Split `TermControl` into a Core, Interactivity, and Control layer (#9820)
## Summary of the Pull Request
Brace yourselves, it's finally here. This PR does the dirty work of splitting the monolithic `TermControl` into three components. These components are:
* `ControlCore`: This encapsulates the `Terminal` instance, the `DxEngine` and `Renderer`, and the `Connection`. This is intended to everything that someone might need to stand up a terminal instance in a control, but without any regard for how the UX works.
* `ControlInteractivity`: This is a wrapper for the `ControlCore`, which holds the logic for things like double-click, right click copy/paste, selection, etc. This is intended to be a UI framework-independent abstraction. The methods this layer exposes can be called the same from both the WinUI TermControl and the WPF control.
* `TermControl`: This is the UWP control. It's got a Core and Interactivity inside it, which it uses for the actual logic of the terminal itself. TermControl's main responsibility is now
By splitting into smaller pieces, it will enable us to
* write unit tests for the `Core` and `Interactivity` bits, which we desparately need
* Combine `ControlCore` and `ControlInteractivity` in an out-of-proc core process in the future, to enable tab tearout.
However, we're not doing that work quite yet. There's still lots of work to be done to enable that, thought this is likely the biggest portion.
Ideally, this would just be methods moved wholesale from one file to another. Unfortunately, there are a bunch of cases where that didn't work as well as expected. Especially when trying to better enforce the boundary between the classes.
We've got a couple tests here that I've added. These are partially examples, and partially things I ran into while implementing this. A bunch of things from #7001 can go in now that we have this.
This PR is gonna be a huge pain to review - 38 files with 3,730 additions and 1,661 deletions is nothing to scoff at. It will also conflict 100% with anything that's targeting `TermControl`. I'm hoping we can review this over the course of the next week and just be done with it, and leave plenty of runway for 1.9 bugs in post.
## References
* In pursuit of #1256
* Proc Model: #5000
* https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5
## PR Checklist
* [x] Closes #6842
* [x] Closes https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5#card-50760249
* [x] Closes https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5#card-50760258
* [x] I work here
* [x] Tests added/passed
* [n/a] Requires documentation to be updated
## Detailed Description of the Pull Request / Additional comments
* I don't love the names `ControlCore` and `ControlInteractivity`. Open to other names.
* I added a `ICoreState` interface for "properties that come from the `ControlCore`, but consumers of the `TermControl` need to know". In the future, these will all need to be handled specially, because they might involve an RPC call to retrieve the info from the core (or cache it) in the window process.
* I've added more `EventArgs` to make more events proper `TypedEvent`s.
* I've changed how the TerminalApp layer requests updated TaskbarProgress state. It doesn't need to pump TermControl to raise a new event anymore.
* ~~Something that snuck into this branch in the very long history is the switch to `DCompositionCreateSurfaceHandle` for the `DxEngine`. @miniksa wrote this originally in 30b8335, I'm just finally committing it here. We'll need that in the future for the out-of-proc stuff.~~
* I reverted this in c113b65d9. We can revert _that_ commit when we want to come back to it.
* I've changed the acrylic handler a decent amount. But added tests!
* All the `ThrottledFunc` things are left in `TermControl`. Some might be able to move down into core/interactivity, but once we figure out how to use a different kind of Dispatcher (because a UI thread won't necessarily exist for those components).
* I've undoubtably messed up the merging of the locking around the appearance config stuff recently
## Validation Steps Performed
I've got a rolling list in https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/issues/6842#issuecomment-810990460 that I'm updating as I go.
2021-04-27 10:50:45 -05:00
|
|
|
auto opacityCallback = [&](auto&&, Control::TransparencyChangedEventArgs args) mutable {
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(expectedOpacity, args.Opacity());
|
Change the `ControlCore` layer to own a copy of its settings (#11619)
## Summary of the Pull Request
Currently, the TermControl and ControlCore recieve a settings object that implements `IControlSettings`. They use for this for both reading the settings they should use, and also storing some runtime overrides to those settings (namely, `Opacity`). The object they recieve currently is a `T.S.M.TerminalSettings` object, as well as another `TerminalSettings` object if the user wants to have an `unfocusedAppearance`. All these are all hosted in the same process, so everything is fine and dandy.
With the upcoming move to having the Terminal split into multiple processes, this will no longer work. If the `ControlCore` in the Content Process is given a pointer to a `TerminalSettings` in a certain Window Process, and that control is subsequently moved to another window, then there's no guarantee that the original `TerminalSettings` object continues to exist. In this scenario, when window 1 is closed, now the Core is unable to read any settings, because the process that owned that object no longer exists.
The solution to this issue is to have the `ControlCore`'s own their own copy of the settings they were created with. that way, they can be confident those settings will always exist. Enter `ControlSettings`, a dumb struct for just storing all the contents of the Settings. I used x-macros for this, so that we don't need to copy-paste into this file every time we add a setting.
Changing this has all sorts of other fallout effects:
* Previewing a scheme/anything is a tad bit more annoying. Before, we could just sneak the previewed scheme into a `TerminalSettings` that lived between the settings we created the control with, and the settings they were actually using, and it would _just work_. Even explaining that here, it sounds like magic, because it was. However, now, the TermControl can't use a layered `TerminalSettings` for the settings anymore. Now we need to actually read out the current color table, and set the whole scheme when we change it. So now there's also a `Microsoft.Terminal.Core.Scheme` _struct_ for holding that data.
- Why a `struct`? Because that will go across the process boundary as a blob, rather than as a pointer to an object in the other process. That way we can transit the whole struct from window to core safely.
* A TermControl doesn't have a `IControlSettings` at all anymore - it initalizes itself via the settings in the `Core`. This will be useful for tear-out, when we need to have the `TermControl` initialize itself from just a `ControlCore`, without being able to rebuild the settings from scratch.
* The `TabTests` that were written under the assumption that the Control had a layered `TerminalSettings` obviously broke, as they were designed to. They've been modified to reflect the new reality.
* When we initialize the Control, we give it the settings and the `UnfocusedAppearance` all at once. If we don't give it an `unfocusedAppearance`, it will just use the focused appearance as the unfocused appearance.
* The Control no longer can _write_ settings to the `ControlSettings`. We don't want to be storing things in there. Pretty much everything we set in the control, we store somewhere other than in the settings object itself. However, `opacity` and `useAcrylic`, we need to store in a handy new `RUNTIME_SETTING` property. We can write those runtime overrides to those properties.
* We no longer store the color scheme for a pane in the persisted state. I'm tracking that in #9800. I don't think it's too hard to add back, but I wanted this in front of eyes sooner than later.
## References
* #1256
* #5000
* #9794 has the scheme previewing in it.
* #9818 is WAY more possible now.
## PR Checklist
* [x] Surprisingly there wasn't ever a card or issue for this one. This was only ever a bullet point in #5000.
* A bunch of these issues were fixed along the way, though I never intended to fix them:
* [x] Closes #11571
* [x] Closes #11586
* [x] Closes #7219
* [x] Closes #11067
* [x] I think #11623 actually ended up resolving this one, but I'm double tapping on it here: Closes #5703
* [x] I work here
* [x] Tests added/passed
* [n/a] Requires documentation to be updated
## Detailed Description of the Pull Request / Additional comments
Along the way I tried to clean up code where possible, but not too agressively.
I didn't end up converting the various `MockTerminalSettings` classes used in tests to the x macros quite yet. I wanted to merge this with #11416 in `main` before I went too crazy.
## Validation Steps Performed
* [x] Scheme previewing works
* [x] Adjusting the font size works
* [x] focused/unfocused appearances still work
* [x] mouse-wheeling opacity still works
* [x] acrylic & cleartype still does the right thing
* [x] saving the settings still works
* [x] going wild on sliding the opacity slider in the settings doesn't crash the terminal
* [x] toggling retro effects with a keybinding still works
* [x] toggling retro effects with the command palette works
* [x] The matrix of (`useAcrylic(true,false)`)x(`opacity(50,100)`)x(`antialiasingMode(cleartype, grayscale)`) works as expected. Slightly changed, falls back to grayscale more often, but looks more right.
2021-12-01 13:33:51 -06:00
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(expectedOpacity, core->Opacity());
|
|
|
|
|
// The Settings object's opacity shouldn't be changed
|
2024-04-23 02:07:00 +02:00
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(0.5f, settings->Opacity());
|
Split `TermControl` into a Core, Interactivity, and Control layer (#9820)
## Summary of the Pull Request
Brace yourselves, it's finally here. This PR does the dirty work of splitting the monolithic `TermControl` into three components. These components are:
* `ControlCore`: This encapsulates the `Terminal` instance, the `DxEngine` and `Renderer`, and the `Connection`. This is intended to everything that someone might need to stand up a terminal instance in a control, but without any regard for how the UX works.
* `ControlInteractivity`: This is a wrapper for the `ControlCore`, which holds the logic for things like double-click, right click copy/paste, selection, etc. This is intended to be a UI framework-independent abstraction. The methods this layer exposes can be called the same from both the WinUI TermControl and the WPF control.
* `TermControl`: This is the UWP control. It's got a Core and Interactivity inside it, which it uses for the actual logic of the terminal itself. TermControl's main responsibility is now
By splitting into smaller pieces, it will enable us to
* write unit tests for the `Core` and `Interactivity` bits, which we desparately need
* Combine `ControlCore` and `ControlInteractivity` in an out-of-proc core process in the future, to enable tab tearout.
However, we're not doing that work quite yet. There's still lots of work to be done to enable that, thought this is likely the biggest portion.
Ideally, this would just be methods moved wholesale from one file to another. Unfortunately, there are a bunch of cases where that didn't work as well as expected. Especially when trying to better enforce the boundary between the classes.
We've got a couple tests here that I've added. These are partially examples, and partially things I ran into while implementing this. A bunch of things from #7001 can go in now that we have this.
This PR is gonna be a huge pain to review - 38 files with 3,730 additions and 1,661 deletions is nothing to scoff at. It will also conflict 100% with anything that's targeting `TermControl`. I'm hoping we can review this over the course of the next week and just be done with it, and leave plenty of runway for 1.9 bugs in post.
## References
* In pursuit of #1256
* Proc Model: #5000
* https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5
## PR Checklist
* [x] Closes #6842
* [x] Closes https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5#card-50760249
* [x] Closes https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5#card-50760258
* [x] I work here
* [x] Tests added/passed
* [n/a] Requires documentation to be updated
## Detailed Description of the Pull Request / Additional comments
* I don't love the names `ControlCore` and `ControlInteractivity`. Open to other names.
* I added a `ICoreState` interface for "properties that come from the `ControlCore`, but consumers of the `TermControl` need to know". In the future, these will all need to be handled specially, because they might involve an RPC call to retrieve the info from the core (or cache it) in the window process.
* I've added more `EventArgs` to make more events proper `TypedEvent`s.
* I've changed how the TerminalApp layer requests updated TaskbarProgress state. It doesn't need to pump TermControl to raise a new event anymore.
* ~~Something that snuck into this branch in the very long history is the switch to `DCompositionCreateSurfaceHandle` for the `DxEngine`. @miniksa wrote this originally in 30b8335, I'm just finally committing it here. We'll need that in the future for the out-of-proc stuff.~~
* I reverted this in c113b65d9. We can revert _that_ commit when we want to come back to it.
* I've changed the acrylic handler a decent amount. But added tests!
* All the `ThrottledFunc` things are left in `TermControl`. Some might be able to move down into core/interactivity, but once we figure out how to use a different kind of Dispatcher (because a UI thread won't necessarily exist for those components).
* I've undoubtably messed up the merging of the locking around the appearance config stuff recently
## Validation Steps Performed
I've got a rolling list in https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/issues/6842#issuecomment-810990460 that I'm updating as I go.
2021-04-27 10:50:45 -05:00
|
|
|
|
2024-04-23 02:07:00 +02:00
|
|
|
if (expectedOpacity < 1.0f)
|
Split `TermControl` into a Core, Interactivity, and Control layer (#9820)
## Summary of the Pull Request
Brace yourselves, it's finally here. This PR does the dirty work of splitting the monolithic `TermControl` into three components. These components are:
* `ControlCore`: This encapsulates the `Terminal` instance, the `DxEngine` and `Renderer`, and the `Connection`. This is intended to everything that someone might need to stand up a terminal instance in a control, but without any regard for how the UX works.
* `ControlInteractivity`: This is a wrapper for the `ControlCore`, which holds the logic for things like double-click, right click copy/paste, selection, etc. This is intended to be a UI framework-independent abstraction. The methods this layer exposes can be called the same from both the WinUI TermControl and the WPF control.
* `TermControl`: This is the UWP control. It's got a Core and Interactivity inside it, which it uses for the actual logic of the terminal itself. TermControl's main responsibility is now
By splitting into smaller pieces, it will enable us to
* write unit tests for the `Core` and `Interactivity` bits, which we desparately need
* Combine `ControlCore` and `ControlInteractivity` in an out-of-proc core process in the future, to enable tab tearout.
However, we're not doing that work quite yet. There's still lots of work to be done to enable that, thought this is likely the biggest portion.
Ideally, this would just be methods moved wholesale from one file to another. Unfortunately, there are a bunch of cases where that didn't work as well as expected. Especially when trying to better enforce the boundary between the classes.
We've got a couple tests here that I've added. These are partially examples, and partially things I ran into while implementing this. A bunch of things from #7001 can go in now that we have this.
This PR is gonna be a huge pain to review - 38 files with 3,730 additions and 1,661 deletions is nothing to scoff at. It will also conflict 100% with anything that's targeting `TermControl`. I'm hoping we can review this over the course of the next week and just be done with it, and leave plenty of runway for 1.9 bugs in post.
## References
* In pursuit of #1256
* Proc Model: #5000
* https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5
## PR Checklist
* [x] Closes #6842
* [x] Closes https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5#card-50760249
* [x] Closes https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5#card-50760258
* [x] I work here
* [x] Tests added/passed
* [n/a] Requires documentation to be updated
## Detailed Description of the Pull Request / Additional comments
* I don't love the names `ControlCore` and `ControlInteractivity`. Open to other names.
* I added a `ICoreState` interface for "properties that come from the `ControlCore`, but consumers of the `TermControl` need to know". In the future, these will all need to be handled specially, because they might involve an RPC call to retrieve the info from the core (or cache it) in the window process.
* I've added more `EventArgs` to make more events proper `TypedEvent`s.
* I've changed how the TerminalApp layer requests updated TaskbarProgress state. It doesn't need to pump TermControl to raise a new event anymore.
* ~~Something that snuck into this branch in the very long history is the switch to `DCompositionCreateSurfaceHandle` for the `DxEngine`. @miniksa wrote this originally in 30b8335, I'm just finally committing it here. We'll need that in the future for the out-of-proc stuff.~~
* I reverted this in c113b65d9. We can revert _that_ commit when we want to come back to it.
* I've changed the acrylic handler a decent amount. But added tests!
* All the `ThrottledFunc` things are left in `TermControl`. Some might be able to move down into core/interactivity, but once we figure out how to use a different kind of Dispatcher (because a UI thread won't necessarily exist for those components).
* I've undoubtably messed up the merging of the locking around the appearance config stuff recently
## Validation Steps Performed
I've got a rolling list in https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/issues/6842#issuecomment-810990460 that I'm updating as I go.
2021-04-27 10:50:45 -05:00
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_IS_TRUE(settings->UseAcrylic());
|
Change the `ControlCore` layer to own a copy of its settings (#11619)
## Summary of the Pull Request
Currently, the TermControl and ControlCore recieve a settings object that implements `IControlSettings`. They use for this for both reading the settings they should use, and also storing some runtime overrides to those settings (namely, `Opacity`). The object they recieve currently is a `T.S.M.TerminalSettings` object, as well as another `TerminalSettings` object if the user wants to have an `unfocusedAppearance`. All these are all hosted in the same process, so everything is fine and dandy.
With the upcoming move to having the Terminal split into multiple processes, this will no longer work. If the `ControlCore` in the Content Process is given a pointer to a `TerminalSettings` in a certain Window Process, and that control is subsequently moved to another window, then there's no guarantee that the original `TerminalSettings` object continues to exist. In this scenario, when window 1 is closed, now the Core is unable to read any settings, because the process that owned that object no longer exists.
The solution to this issue is to have the `ControlCore`'s own their own copy of the settings they were created with. that way, they can be confident those settings will always exist. Enter `ControlSettings`, a dumb struct for just storing all the contents of the Settings. I used x-macros for this, so that we don't need to copy-paste into this file every time we add a setting.
Changing this has all sorts of other fallout effects:
* Previewing a scheme/anything is a tad bit more annoying. Before, we could just sneak the previewed scheme into a `TerminalSettings` that lived between the settings we created the control with, and the settings they were actually using, and it would _just work_. Even explaining that here, it sounds like magic, because it was. However, now, the TermControl can't use a layered `TerminalSettings` for the settings anymore. Now we need to actually read out the current color table, and set the whole scheme when we change it. So now there's also a `Microsoft.Terminal.Core.Scheme` _struct_ for holding that data.
- Why a `struct`? Because that will go across the process boundary as a blob, rather than as a pointer to an object in the other process. That way we can transit the whole struct from window to core safely.
* A TermControl doesn't have a `IControlSettings` at all anymore - it initalizes itself via the settings in the `Core`. This will be useful for tear-out, when we need to have the `TermControl` initialize itself from just a `ControlCore`, without being able to rebuild the settings from scratch.
* The `TabTests` that were written under the assumption that the Control had a layered `TerminalSettings` obviously broke, as they were designed to. They've been modified to reflect the new reality.
* When we initialize the Control, we give it the settings and the `UnfocusedAppearance` all at once. If we don't give it an `unfocusedAppearance`, it will just use the focused appearance as the unfocused appearance.
* The Control no longer can _write_ settings to the `ControlSettings`. We don't want to be storing things in there. Pretty much everything we set in the control, we store somewhere other than in the settings object itself. However, `opacity` and `useAcrylic`, we need to store in a handy new `RUNTIME_SETTING` property. We can write those runtime overrides to those properties.
* We no longer store the color scheme for a pane in the persisted state. I'm tracking that in #9800. I don't think it's too hard to add back, but I wanted this in front of eyes sooner than later.
## References
* #1256
* #5000
* #9794 has the scheme previewing in it.
* #9818 is WAY more possible now.
## PR Checklist
* [x] Surprisingly there wasn't ever a card or issue for this one. This was only ever a bullet point in #5000.
* A bunch of these issues were fixed along the way, though I never intended to fix them:
* [x] Closes #11571
* [x] Closes #11586
* [x] Closes #7219
* [x] Closes #11067
* [x] I think #11623 actually ended up resolving this one, but I'm double tapping on it here: Closes #5703
* [x] I work here
* [x] Tests added/passed
* [n/a] Requires documentation to be updated
## Detailed Description of the Pull Request / Additional comments
Along the way I tried to clean up code where possible, but not too agressively.
I didn't end up converting the various `MockTerminalSettings` classes used in tests to the x macros quite yet. I wanted to merge this with #11416 in `main` before I went too crazy.
## Validation Steps Performed
* [x] Scheme previewing works
* [x] Adjusting the font size works
* [x] focused/unfocused appearances still work
* [x] mouse-wheeling opacity still works
* [x] acrylic & cleartype still does the right thing
* [x] saving the settings still works
* [x] going wild on sliding the opacity slider in the settings doesn't crash the terminal
* [x] toggling retro effects with a keybinding still works
* [x] toggling retro effects with the command palette works
* [x] The matrix of (`useAcrylic(true,false)`)x(`opacity(50,100)`)x(`antialiasingMode(cleartype, grayscale)`) works as expected. Slightly changed, falls back to grayscale more often, but looks more right.
2021-12-01 13:33:51 -06:00
|
|
|
VERIFY_IS_TRUE(core->_settings->UseAcrylic());
|
Split `TermControl` into a Core, Interactivity, and Control layer (#9820)
## Summary of the Pull Request
Brace yourselves, it's finally here. This PR does the dirty work of splitting the monolithic `TermControl` into three components. These components are:
* `ControlCore`: This encapsulates the `Terminal` instance, the `DxEngine` and `Renderer`, and the `Connection`. This is intended to everything that someone might need to stand up a terminal instance in a control, but without any regard for how the UX works.
* `ControlInteractivity`: This is a wrapper for the `ControlCore`, which holds the logic for things like double-click, right click copy/paste, selection, etc. This is intended to be a UI framework-independent abstraction. The methods this layer exposes can be called the same from both the WinUI TermControl and the WPF control.
* `TermControl`: This is the UWP control. It's got a Core and Interactivity inside it, which it uses for the actual logic of the terminal itself. TermControl's main responsibility is now
By splitting into smaller pieces, it will enable us to
* write unit tests for the `Core` and `Interactivity` bits, which we desparately need
* Combine `ControlCore` and `ControlInteractivity` in an out-of-proc core process in the future, to enable tab tearout.
However, we're not doing that work quite yet. There's still lots of work to be done to enable that, thought this is likely the biggest portion.
Ideally, this would just be methods moved wholesale from one file to another. Unfortunately, there are a bunch of cases where that didn't work as well as expected. Especially when trying to better enforce the boundary between the classes.
We've got a couple tests here that I've added. These are partially examples, and partially things I ran into while implementing this. A bunch of things from #7001 can go in now that we have this.
This PR is gonna be a huge pain to review - 38 files with 3,730 additions and 1,661 deletions is nothing to scoff at. It will also conflict 100% with anything that's targeting `TermControl`. I'm hoping we can review this over the course of the next week and just be done with it, and leave plenty of runway for 1.9 bugs in post.
## References
* In pursuit of #1256
* Proc Model: #5000
* https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5
## PR Checklist
* [x] Closes #6842
* [x] Closes https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5#card-50760249
* [x] Closes https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5#card-50760258
* [x] I work here
* [x] Tests added/passed
* [n/a] Requires documentation to be updated
## Detailed Description of the Pull Request / Additional comments
* I don't love the names `ControlCore` and `ControlInteractivity`. Open to other names.
* I added a `ICoreState` interface for "properties that come from the `ControlCore`, but consumers of the `TermControl` need to know". In the future, these will all need to be handled specially, because they might involve an RPC call to retrieve the info from the core (or cache it) in the window process.
* I've added more `EventArgs` to make more events proper `TypedEvent`s.
* I've changed how the TerminalApp layer requests updated TaskbarProgress state. It doesn't need to pump TermControl to raise a new event anymore.
* ~~Something that snuck into this branch in the very long history is the switch to `DCompositionCreateSurfaceHandle` for the `DxEngine`. @miniksa wrote this originally in 30b8335, I'm just finally committing it here. We'll need that in the future for the out-of-proc stuff.~~
* I reverted this in c113b65d9. We can revert _that_ commit when we want to come back to it.
* I've changed the acrylic handler a decent amount. But added tests!
* All the `ThrottledFunc` things are left in `TermControl`. Some might be able to move down into core/interactivity, but once we figure out how to use a different kind of Dispatcher (because a UI thread won't necessarily exist for those components).
* I've undoubtably messed up the merging of the locking around the appearance config stuff recently
## Validation Steps Performed
I've got a rolling list in https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/issues/6842#issuecomment-810990460 that I'm updating as I go.
2021-04-27 10:50:45 -05:00
|
|
|
}
|
2021-09-20 12:08:13 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// GH#603: Adjusting opacity shouldn't change whether or not we
|
|
|
|
|
// requested acrylic.
|
2021-10-07 06:39:20 -05:00
|
|
|
|
2024-04-23 02:07:00 +02:00
|
|
|
auto expectedUseAcrylic = expectedOpacity < 1.0f;
|
2022-12-09 12:50:56 -08:00
|
|
|
VERIFY_IS_TRUE(core->_settings->UseAcrylic());
|
Change the `ControlCore` layer to own a copy of its settings (#11619)
## Summary of the Pull Request
Currently, the TermControl and ControlCore recieve a settings object that implements `IControlSettings`. They use for this for both reading the settings they should use, and also storing some runtime overrides to those settings (namely, `Opacity`). The object they recieve currently is a `T.S.M.TerminalSettings` object, as well as another `TerminalSettings` object if the user wants to have an `unfocusedAppearance`. All these are all hosted in the same process, so everything is fine and dandy.
With the upcoming move to having the Terminal split into multiple processes, this will no longer work. If the `ControlCore` in the Content Process is given a pointer to a `TerminalSettings` in a certain Window Process, and that control is subsequently moved to another window, then there's no guarantee that the original `TerminalSettings` object continues to exist. In this scenario, when window 1 is closed, now the Core is unable to read any settings, because the process that owned that object no longer exists.
The solution to this issue is to have the `ControlCore`'s own their own copy of the settings they were created with. that way, they can be confident those settings will always exist. Enter `ControlSettings`, a dumb struct for just storing all the contents of the Settings. I used x-macros for this, so that we don't need to copy-paste into this file every time we add a setting.
Changing this has all sorts of other fallout effects:
* Previewing a scheme/anything is a tad bit more annoying. Before, we could just sneak the previewed scheme into a `TerminalSettings` that lived between the settings we created the control with, and the settings they were actually using, and it would _just work_. Even explaining that here, it sounds like magic, because it was. However, now, the TermControl can't use a layered `TerminalSettings` for the settings anymore. Now we need to actually read out the current color table, and set the whole scheme when we change it. So now there's also a `Microsoft.Terminal.Core.Scheme` _struct_ for holding that data.
- Why a `struct`? Because that will go across the process boundary as a blob, rather than as a pointer to an object in the other process. That way we can transit the whole struct from window to core safely.
* A TermControl doesn't have a `IControlSettings` at all anymore - it initalizes itself via the settings in the `Core`. This will be useful for tear-out, when we need to have the `TermControl` initialize itself from just a `ControlCore`, without being able to rebuild the settings from scratch.
* The `TabTests` that were written under the assumption that the Control had a layered `TerminalSettings` obviously broke, as they were designed to. They've been modified to reflect the new reality.
* When we initialize the Control, we give it the settings and the `UnfocusedAppearance` all at once. If we don't give it an `unfocusedAppearance`, it will just use the focused appearance as the unfocused appearance.
* The Control no longer can _write_ settings to the `ControlSettings`. We don't want to be storing things in there. Pretty much everything we set in the control, we store somewhere other than in the settings object itself. However, `opacity` and `useAcrylic`, we need to store in a handy new `RUNTIME_SETTING` property. We can write those runtime overrides to those properties.
* We no longer store the color scheme for a pane in the persisted state. I'm tracking that in #9800. I don't think it's too hard to add back, but I wanted this in front of eyes sooner than later.
## References
* #1256
* #5000
* #9794 has the scheme previewing in it.
* #9818 is WAY more possible now.
## PR Checklist
* [x] Surprisingly there wasn't ever a card or issue for this one. This was only ever a bullet point in #5000.
* A bunch of these issues were fixed along the way, though I never intended to fix them:
* [x] Closes #11571
* [x] Closes #11586
* [x] Closes #7219
* [x] Closes #11067
* [x] I think #11623 actually ended up resolving this one, but I'm double tapping on it here: Closes #5703
* [x] I work here
* [x] Tests added/passed
* [n/a] Requires documentation to be updated
## Detailed Description of the Pull Request / Additional comments
Along the way I tried to clean up code where possible, but not too agressively.
I didn't end up converting the various `MockTerminalSettings` classes used in tests to the x macros quite yet. I wanted to merge this with #11416 in `main` before I went too crazy.
## Validation Steps Performed
* [x] Scheme previewing works
* [x] Adjusting the font size works
* [x] focused/unfocused appearances still work
* [x] mouse-wheeling opacity still works
* [x] acrylic & cleartype still does the right thing
* [x] saving the settings still works
* [x] going wild on sliding the opacity slider in the settings doesn't crash the terminal
* [x] toggling retro effects with a keybinding still works
* [x] toggling retro effects with the command palette works
* [x] The matrix of (`useAcrylic(true,false)`)x(`opacity(50,100)`)x(`antialiasingMode(cleartype, grayscale)`) works as expected. Slightly changed, falls back to grayscale more often, but looks more right.
2021-12-01 13:33:51 -06:00
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(expectedUseAcrylic, core->UseAcrylic());
|
Split `TermControl` into a Core, Interactivity, and Control layer (#9820)
## Summary of the Pull Request
Brace yourselves, it's finally here. This PR does the dirty work of splitting the monolithic `TermControl` into three components. These components are:
* `ControlCore`: This encapsulates the `Terminal` instance, the `DxEngine` and `Renderer`, and the `Connection`. This is intended to everything that someone might need to stand up a terminal instance in a control, but without any regard for how the UX works.
* `ControlInteractivity`: This is a wrapper for the `ControlCore`, which holds the logic for things like double-click, right click copy/paste, selection, etc. This is intended to be a UI framework-independent abstraction. The methods this layer exposes can be called the same from both the WinUI TermControl and the WPF control.
* `TermControl`: This is the UWP control. It's got a Core and Interactivity inside it, which it uses for the actual logic of the terminal itself. TermControl's main responsibility is now
By splitting into smaller pieces, it will enable us to
* write unit tests for the `Core` and `Interactivity` bits, which we desparately need
* Combine `ControlCore` and `ControlInteractivity` in an out-of-proc core process in the future, to enable tab tearout.
However, we're not doing that work quite yet. There's still lots of work to be done to enable that, thought this is likely the biggest portion.
Ideally, this would just be methods moved wholesale from one file to another. Unfortunately, there are a bunch of cases where that didn't work as well as expected. Especially when trying to better enforce the boundary between the classes.
We've got a couple tests here that I've added. These are partially examples, and partially things I ran into while implementing this. A bunch of things from #7001 can go in now that we have this.
This PR is gonna be a huge pain to review - 38 files with 3,730 additions and 1,661 deletions is nothing to scoff at. It will also conflict 100% with anything that's targeting `TermControl`. I'm hoping we can review this over the course of the next week and just be done with it, and leave plenty of runway for 1.9 bugs in post.
## References
* In pursuit of #1256
* Proc Model: #5000
* https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5
## PR Checklist
* [x] Closes #6842
* [x] Closes https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5#card-50760249
* [x] Closes https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5#card-50760258
* [x] I work here
* [x] Tests added/passed
* [n/a] Requires documentation to be updated
## Detailed Description of the Pull Request / Additional comments
* I don't love the names `ControlCore` and `ControlInteractivity`. Open to other names.
* I added a `ICoreState` interface for "properties that come from the `ControlCore`, but consumers of the `TermControl` need to know". In the future, these will all need to be handled specially, because they might involve an RPC call to retrieve the info from the core (or cache it) in the window process.
* I've added more `EventArgs` to make more events proper `TypedEvent`s.
* I've changed how the TerminalApp layer requests updated TaskbarProgress state. It doesn't need to pump TermControl to raise a new event anymore.
* ~~Something that snuck into this branch in the very long history is the switch to `DCompositionCreateSurfaceHandle` for the `DxEngine`. @miniksa wrote this originally in 30b8335, I'm just finally committing it here. We'll need that in the future for the out-of-proc stuff.~~
* I reverted this in c113b65d9. We can revert _that_ commit when we want to come back to it.
* I've changed the acrylic handler a decent amount. But added tests!
* All the `ThrottledFunc` things are left in `TermControl`. Some might be able to move down into core/interactivity, but once we figure out how to use a different kind of Dispatcher (because a UI thread won't necessarily exist for those components).
* I've undoubtably messed up the merging of the locking around the appearance config stuff recently
## Validation Steps Performed
I've got a rolling list in https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/issues/6842#issuecomment-810990460 that I'm updating as I go.
2021-04-27 10:50:45 -05:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
core->TransparencyChanged(opacityCallback);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_IS_FALSE(core->_initializedTerminal);
|
|
|
|
|
// "Cascadia Mono" ends up with an actual size of 9x19 at 96DPI. So
|
|
|
|
|
// let's just arbitrarily start with a 270x380px (30x20 chars) window
|
|
|
|
|
core->Initialize(270, 380, 1.0);
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_IS_TRUE(core->_initializedTerminal);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Log::Comment(L"Increasing opacity till fully opaque");
|
2024-04-23 02:07:00 +02:00
|
|
|
expectedOpacity += 0.1f; // = 0.6;
|
|
|
|
|
core->AdjustOpacity(0.1f);
|
|
|
|
|
expectedOpacity += 0.1f; // = 0.7;
|
|
|
|
|
core->AdjustOpacity(0.1f);
|
|
|
|
|
expectedOpacity += 0.1f; // = 0.8;
|
|
|
|
|
core->AdjustOpacity(0.1f);
|
|
|
|
|
expectedOpacity += 0.1f; // = 0.9;
|
|
|
|
|
core->AdjustOpacity(0.1f);
|
|
|
|
|
expectedOpacity += 0.1f; // = 1.0;
|
Split `TermControl` into a Core, Interactivity, and Control layer (#9820)
## Summary of the Pull Request
Brace yourselves, it's finally here. This PR does the dirty work of splitting the monolithic `TermControl` into three components. These components are:
* `ControlCore`: This encapsulates the `Terminal` instance, the `DxEngine` and `Renderer`, and the `Connection`. This is intended to everything that someone might need to stand up a terminal instance in a control, but without any regard for how the UX works.
* `ControlInteractivity`: This is a wrapper for the `ControlCore`, which holds the logic for things like double-click, right click copy/paste, selection, etc. This is intended to be a UI framework-independent abstraction. The methods this layer exposes can be called the same from both the WinUI TermControl and the WPF control.
* `TermControl`: This is the UWP control. It's got a Core and Interactivity inside it, which it uses for the actual logic of the terminal itself. TermControl's main responsibility is now
By splitting into smaller pieces, it will enable us to
* write unit tests for the `Core` and `Interactivity` bits, which we desparately need
* Combine `ControlCore` and `ControlInteractivity` in an out-of-proc core process in the future, to enable tab tearout.
However, we're not doing that work quite yet. There's still lots of work to be done to enable that, thought this is likely the biggest portion.
Ideally, this would just be methods moved wholesale from one file to another. Unfortunately, there are a bunch of cases where that didn't work as well as expected. Especially when trying to better enforce the boundary between the classes.
We've got a couple tests here that I've added. These are partially examples, and partially things I ran into while implementing this. A bunch of things from #7001 can go in now that we have this.
This PR is gonna be a huge pain to review - 38 files with 3,730 additions and 1,661 deletions is nothing to scoff at. It will also conflict 100% with anything that's targeting `TermControl`. I'm hoping we can review this over the course of the next week and just be done with it, and leave plenty of runway for 1.9 bugs in post.
## References
* In pursuit of #1256
* Proc Model: #5000
* https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5
## PR Checklist
* [x] Closes #6842
* [x] Closes https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5#card-50760249
* [x] Closes https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5#card-50760258
* [x] I work here
* [x] Tests added/passed
* [n/a] Requires documentation to be updated
## Detailed Description of the Pull Request / Additional comments
* I don't love the names `ControlCore` and `ControlInteractivity`. Open to other names.
* I added a `ICoreState` interface for "properties that come from the `ControlCore`, but consumers of the `TermControl` need to know". In the future, these will all need to be handled specially, because they might involve an RPC call to retrieve the info from the core (or cache it) in the window process.
* I've added more `EventArgs` to make more events proper `TypedEvent`s.
* I've changed how the TerminalApp layer requests updated TaskbarProgress state. It doesn't need to pump TermControl to raise a new event anymore.
* ~~Something that snuck into this branch in the very long history is the switch to `DCompositionCreateSurfaceHandle` for the `DxEngine`. @miniksa wrote this originally in 30b8335, I'm just finally committing it here. We'll need that in the future for the out-of-proc stuff.~~
* I reverted this in c113b65d9. We can revert _that_ commit when we want to come back to it.
* I've changed the acrylic handler a decent amount. But added tests!
* All the `ThrottledFunc` things are left in `TermControl`. Some might be able to move down into core/interactivity, but once we figure out how to use a different kind of Dispatcher (because a UI thread won't necessarily exist for those components).
* I've undoubtably messed up the merging of the locking around the appearance config stuff recently
## Validation Steps Performed
I've got a rolling list in https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/issues/6842#issuecomment-810990460 that I'm updating as I go.
2021-04-27 10:50:45 -05:00
|
|
|
// cast to float because floating point numbers are mean
|
2024-04-23 02:07:00 +02:00
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(1.0f, expectedOpacity);
|
|
|
|
|
core->AdjustOpacity(0.1f);
|
Split `TermControl` into a Core, Interactivity, and Control layer (#9820)
## Summary of the Pull Request
Brace yourselves, it's finally here. This PR does the dirty work of splitting the monolithic `TermControl` into three components. These components are:
* `ControlCore`: This encapsulates the `Terminal` instance, the `DxEngine` and `Renderer`, and the `Connection`. This is intended to everything that someone might need to stand up a terminal instance in a control, but without any regard for how the UX works.
* `ControlInteractivity`: This is a wrapper for the `ControlCore`, which holds the logic for things like double-click, right click copy/paste, selection, etc. This is intended to be a UI framework-independent abstraction. The methods this layer exposes can be called the same from both the WinUI TermControl and the WPF control.
* `TermControl`: This is the UWP control. It's got a Core and Interactivity inside it, which it uses for the actual logic of the terminal itself. TermControl's main responsibility is now
By splitting into smaller pieces, it will enable us to
* write unit tests for the `Core` and `Interactivity` bits, which we desparately need
* Combine `ControlCore` and `ControlInteractivity` in an out-of-proc core process in the future, to enable tab tearout.
However, we're not doing that work quite yet. There's still lots of work to be done to enable that, thought this is likely the biggest portion.
Ideally, this would just be methods moved wholesale from one file to another. Unfortunately, there are a bunch of cases where that didn't work as well as expected. Especially when trying to better enforce the boundary between the classes.
We've got a couple tests here that I've added. These are partially examples, and partially things I ran into while implementing this. A bunch of things from #7001 can go in now that we have this.
This PR is gonna be a huge pain to review - 38 files with 3,730 additions and 1,661 deletions is nothing to scoff at. It will also conflict 100% with anything that's targeting `TermControl`. I'm hoping we can review this over the course of the next week and just be done with it, and leave plenty of runway for 1.9 bugs in post.
## References
* In pursuit of #1256
* Proc Model: #5000
* https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5
## PR Checklist
* [x] Closes #6842
* [x] Closes https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5#card-50760249
* [x] Closes https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5#card-50760258
* [x] I work here
* [x] Tests added/passed
* [n/a] Requires documentation to be updated
## Detailed Description of the Pull Request / Additional comments
* I don't love the names `ControlCore` and `ControlInteractivity`. Open to other names.
* I added a `ICoreState` interface for "properties that come from the `ControlCore`, but consumers of the `TermControl` need to know". In the future, these will all need to be handled specially, because they might involve an RPC call to retrieve the info from the core (or cache it) in the window process.
* I've added more `EventArgs` to make more events proper `TypedEvent`s.
* I've changed how the TerminalApp layer requests updated TaskbarProgress state. It doesn't need to pump TermControl to raise a new event anymore.
* ~~Something that snuck into this branch in the very long history is the switch to `DCompositionCreateSurfaceHandle` for the `DxEngine`. @miniksa wrote this originally in 30b8335, I'm just finally committing it here. We'll need that in the future for the out-of-proc stuff.~~
* I reverted this in c113b65d9. We can revert _that_ commit when we want to come back to it.
* I've changed the acrylic handler a decent amount. But added tests!
* All the `ThrottledFunc` things are left in `TermControl`. Some might be able to move down into core/interactivity, but once we figure out how to use a different kind of Dispatcher (because a UI thread won't necessarily exist for those components).
* I've undoubtably messed up the merging of the locking around the appearance config stuff recently
## Validation Steps Performed
I've got a rolling list in https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/issues/6842#issuecomment-810990460 that I'm updating as I go.
2021-04-27 10:50:45 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Log::Comment(L"Increasing opacity more doesn't actually change it to be >1.0");
|
|
|
|
|
|
2024-04-23 02:07:00 +02:00
|
|
|
expectedOpacity = 1.0f;
|
|
|
|
|
core->AdjustOpacity(0.1f);
|
Split `TermControl` into a Core, Interactivity, and Control layer (#9820)
## Summary of the Pull Request
Brace yourselves, it's finally here. This PR does the dirty work of splitting the monolithic `TermControl` into three components. These components are:
* `ControlCore`: This encapsulates the `Terminal` instance, the `DxEngine` and `Renderer`, and the `Connection`. This is intended to everything that someone might need to stand up a terminal instance in a control, but without any regard for how the UX works.
* `ControlInteractivity`: This is a wrapper for the `ControlCore`, which holds the logic for things like double-click, right click copy/paste, selection, etc. This is intended to be a UI framework-independent abstraction. The methods this layer exposes can be called the same from both the WinUI TermControl and the WPF control.
* `TermControl`: This is the UWP control. It's got a Core and Interactivity inside it, which it uses for the actual logic of the terminal itself. TermControl's main responsibility is now
By splitting into smaller pieces, it will enable us to
* write unit tests for the `Core` and `Interactivity` bits, which we desparately need
* Combine `ControlCore` and `ControlInteractivity` in an out-of-proc core process in the future, to enable tab tearout.
However, we're not doing that work quite yet. There's still lots of work to be done to enable that, thought this is likely the biggest portion.
Ideally, this would just be methods moved wholesale from one file to another. Unfortunately, there are a bunch of cases where that didn't work as well as expected. Especially when trying to better enforce the boundary between the classes.
We've got a couple tests here that I've added. These are partially examples, and partially things I ran into while implementing this. A bunch of things from #7001 can go in now that we have this.
This PR is gonna be a huge pain to review - 38 files with 3,730 additions and 1,661 deletions is nothing to scoff at. It will also conflict 100% with anything that's targeting `TermControl`. I'm hoping we can review this over the course of the next week and just be done with it, and leave plenty of runway for 1.9 bugs in post.
## References
* In pursuit of #1256
* Proc Model: #5000
* https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5
## PR Checklist
* [x] Closes #6842
* [x] Closes https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5#card-50760249
* [x] Closes https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5#card-50760258
* [x] I work here
* [x] Tests added/passed
* [n/a] Requires documentation to be updated
## Detailed Description of the Pull Request / Additional comments
* I don't love the names `ControlCore` and `ControlInteractivity`. Open to other names.
* I added a `ICoreState` interface for "properties that come from the `ControlCore`, but consumers of the `TermControl` need to know". In the future, these will all need to be handled specially, because they might involve an RPC call to retrieve the info from the core (or cache it) in the window process.
* I've added more `EventArgs` to make more events proper `TypedEvent`s.
* I've changed how the TerminalApp layer requests updated TaskbarProgress state. It doesn't need to pump TermControl to raise a new event anymore.
* ~~Something that snuck into this branch in the very long history is the switch to `DCompositionCreateSurfaceHandle` for the `DxEngine`. @miniksa wrote this originally in 30b8335, I'm just finally committing it here. We'll need that in the future for the out-of-proc stuff.~~
* I reverted this in c113b65d9. We can revert _that_ commit when we want to come back to it.
* I've changed the acrylic handler a decent amount. But added tests!
* All the `ThrottledFunc` things are left in `TermControl`. Some might be able to move down into core/interactivity, but once we figure out how to use a different kind of Dispatcher (because a UI thread won't necessarily exist for those components).
* I've undoubtably messed up the merging of the locking around the appearance config stuff recently
## Validation Steps Performed
I've got a rolling list in https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/issues/6842#issuecomment-810990460 that I'm updating as I go.
2021-04-27 10:50:45 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Log::Comment(L"Decrease opacity");
|
2024-04-23 02:07:00 +02:00
|
|
|
expectedOpacity -= 0.25f; // = 0.75;
|
|
|
|
|
core->AdjustOpacity(-0.25f);
|
|
|
|
|
expectedOpacity -= 0.25f; // = 0.5;
|
|
|
|
|
core->AdjustOpacity(-0.25f);
|
|
|
|
|
expectedOpacity -= 0.25f; // = 0.25;
|
|
|
|
|
core->AdjustOpacity(-0.25f);
|
|
|
|
|
expectedOpacity -= 0.25f; // = 0.05;
|
Split `TermControl` into a Core, Interactivity, and Control layer (#9820)
## Summary of the Pull Request
Brace yourselves, it's finally here. This PR does the dirty work of splitting the monolithic `TermControl` into three components. These components are:
* `ControlCore`: This encapsulates the `Terminal` instance, the `DxEngine` and `Renderer`, and the `Connection`. This is intended to everything that someone might need to stand up a terminal instance in a control, but without any regard for how the UX works.
* `ControlInteractivity`: This is a wrapper for the `ControlCore`, which holds the logic for things like double-click, right click copy/paste, selection, etc. This is intended to be a UI framework-independent abstraction. The methods this layer exposes can be called the same from both the WinUI TermControl and the WPF control.
* `TermControl`: This is the UWP control. It's got a Core and Interactivity inside it, which it uses for the actual logic of the terminal itself. TermControl's main responsibility is now
By splitting into smaller pieces, it will enable us to
* write unit tests for the `Core` and `Interactivity` bits, which we desparately need
* Combine `ControlCore` and `ControlInteractivity` in an out-of-proc core process in the future, to enable tab tearout.
However, we're not doing that work quite yet. There's still lots of work to be done to enable that, thought this is likely the biggest portion.
Ideally, this would just be methods moved wholesale from one file to another. Unfortunately, there are a bunch of cases where that didn't work as well as expected. Especially when trying to better enforce the boundary between the classes.
We've got a couple tests here that I've added. These are partially examples, and partially things I ran into while implementing this. A bunch of things from #7001 can go in now that we have this.
This PR is gonna be a huge pain to review - 38 files with 3,730 additions and 1,661 deletions is nothing to scoff at. It will also conflict 100% with anything that's targeting `TermControl`. I'm hoping we can review this over the course of the next week and just be done with it, and leave plenty of runway for 1.9 bugs in post.
## References
* In pursuit of #1256
* Proc Model: #5000
* https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5
## PR Checklist
* [x] Closes #6842
* [x] Closes https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5#card-50760249
* [x] Closes https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5#card-50760258
* [x] I work here
* [x] Tests added/passed
* [n/a] Requires documentation to be updated
## Detailed Description of the Pull Request / Additional comments
* I don't love the names `ControlCore` and `ControlInteractivity`. Open to other names.
* I added a `ICoreState` interface for "properties that come from the `ControlCore`, but consumers of the `TermControl` need to know". In the future, these will all need to be handled specially, because they might involve an RPC call to retrieve the info from the core (or cache it) in the window process.
* I've added more `EventArgs` to make more events proper `TypedEvent`s.
* I've changed how the TerminalApp layer requests updated TaskbarProgress state. It doesn't need to pump TermControl to raise a new event anymore.
* ~~Something that snuck into this branch in the very long history is the switch to `DCompositionCreateSurfaceHandle` for the `DxEngine`. @miniksa wrote this originally in 30b8335, I'm just finally committing it here. We'll need that in the future for the out-of-proc stuff.~~
* I reverted this in c113b65d9. We can revert _that_ commit when we want to come back to it.
* I've changed the acrylic handler a decent amount. But added tests!
* All the `ThrottledFunc` things are left in `TermControl`. Some might be able to move down into core/interactivity, but once we figure out how to use a different kind of Dispatcher (because a UI thread won't necessarily exist for those components).
* I've undoubtably messed up the merging of the locking around the appearance config stuff recently
## Validation Steps Performed
I've got a rolling list in https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/issues/6842#issuecomment-810990460 that I'm updating as I go.
2021-04-27 10:50:45 -05:00
|
|
|
// cast to float because floating point numbers are mean
|
2024-04-23 02:07:00 +02:00
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(0.0f, expectedOpacity);
|
|
|
|
|
core->AdjustOpacity(-0.25f);
|
Split `TermControl` into a Core, Interactivity, and Control layer (#9820)
## Summary of the Pull Request
Brace yourselves, it's finally here. This PR does the dirty work of splitting the monolithic `TermControl` into three components. These components are:
* `ControlCore`: This encapsulates the `Terminal` instance, the `DxEngine` and `Renderer`, and the `Connection`. This is intended to everything that someone might need to stand up a terminal instance in a control, but without any regard for how the UX works.
* `ControlInteractivity`: This is a wrapper for the `ControlCore`, which holds the logic for things like double-click, right click copy/paste, selection, etc. This is intended to be a UI framework-independent abstraction. The methods this layer exposes can be called the same from both the WinUI TermControl and the WPF control.
* `TermControl`: This is the UWP control. It's got a Core and Interactivity inside it, which it uses for the actual logic of the terminal itself. TermControl's main responsibility is now
By splitting into smaller pieces, it will enable us to
* write unit tests for the `Core` and `Interactivity` bits, which we desparately need
* Combine `ControlCore` and `ControlInteractivity` in an out-of-proc core process in the future, to enable tab tearout.
However, we're not doing that work quite yet. There's still lots of work to be done to enable that, thought this is likely the biggest portion.
Ideally, this would just be methods moved wholesale from one file to another. Unfortunately, there are a bunch of cases where that didn't work as well as expected. Especially when trying to better enforce the boundary between the classes.
We've got a couple tests here that I've added. These are partially examples, and partially things I ran into while implementing this. A bunch of things from #7001 can go in now that we have this.
This PR is gonna be a huge pain to review - 38 files with 3,730 additions and 1,661 deletions is nothing to scoff at. It will also conflict 100% with anything that's targeting `TermControl`. I'm hoping we can review this over the course of the next week and just be done with it, and leave plenty of runway for 1.9 bugs in post.
## References
* In pursuit of #1256
* Proc Model: #5000
* https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5
## PR Checklist
* [x] Closes #6842
* [x] Closes https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5#card-50760249
* [x] Closes https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5#card-50760258
* [x] I work here
* [x] Tests added/passed
* [n/a] Requires documentation to be updated
## Detailed Description of the Pull Request / Additional comments
* I don't love the names `ControlCore` and `ControlInteractivity`. Open to other names.
* I added a `ICoreState` interface for "properties that come from the `ControlCore`, but consumers of the `TermControl` need to know". In the future, these will all need to be handled specially, because they might involve an RPC call to retrieve the info from the core (or cache it) in the window process.
* I've added more `EventArgs` to make more events proper `TypedEvent`s.
* I've changed how the TerminalApp layer requests updated TaskbarProgress state. It doesn't need to pump TermControl to raise a new event anymore.
* ~~Something that snuck into this branch in the very long history is the switch to `DCompositionCreateSurfaceHandle` for the `DxEngine`. @miniksa wrote this originally in 30b8335, I'm just finally committing it here. We'll need that in the future for the out-of-proc stuff.~~
* I reverted this in c113b65d9. We can revert _that_ commit when we want to come back to it.
* I've changed the acrylic handler a decent amount. But added tests!
* All the `ThrottledFunc` things are left in `TermControl`. Some might be able to move down into core/interactivity, but once we figure out how to use a different kind of Dispatcher (because a UI thread won't necessarily exist for those components).
* I've undoubtably messed up the merging of the locking around the appearance config stuff recently
## Validation Steps Performed
I've got a rolling list in https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/issues/6842#issuecomment-810990460 that I'm updating as I go.
2021-04-27 10:50:45 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Log::Comment(L"Decreasing opacity more doesn't actually change it to be < 0");
|
2024-04-23 02:07:00 +02:00
|
|
|
expectedOpacity = 0.0f;
|
|
|
|
|
core->AdjustOpacity(-0.25f);
|
Split `TermControl` into a Core, Interactivity, and Control layer (#9820)
## Summary of the Pull Request
Brace yourselves, it's finally here. This PR does the dirty work of splitting the monolithic `TermControl` into three components. These components are:
* `ControlCore`: This encapsulates the `Terminal` instance, the `DxEngine` and `Renderer`, and the `Connection`. This is intended to everything that someone might need to stand up a terminal instance in a control, but without any regard for how the UX works.
* `ControlInteractivity`: This is a wrapper for the `ControlCore`, which holds the logic for things like double-click, right click copy/paste, selection, etc. This is intended to be a UI framework-independent abstraction. The methods this layer exposes can be called the same from both the WinUI TermControl and the WPF control.
* `TermControl`: This is the UWP control. It's got a Core and Interactivity inside it, which it uses for the actual logic of the terminal itself. TermControl's main responsibility is now
By splitting into smaller pieces, it will enable us to
* write unit tests for the `Core` and `Interactivity` bits, which we desparately need
* Combine `ControlCore` and `ControlInteractivity` in an out-of-proc core process in the future, to enable tab tearout.
However, we're not doing that work quite yet. There's still lots of work to be done to enable that, thought this is likely the biggest portion.
Ideally, this would just be methods moved wholesale from one file to another. Unfortunately, there are a bunch of cases where that didn't work as well as expected. Especially when trying to better enforce the boundary between the classes.
We've got a couple tests here that I've added. These are partially examples, and partially things I ran into while implementing this. A bunch of things from #7001 can go in now that we have this.
This PR is gonna be a huge pain to review - 38 files with 3,730 additions and 1,661 deletions is nothing to scoff at. It will also conflict 100% with anything that's targeting `TermControl`. I'm hoping we can review this over the course of the next week and just be done with it, and leave plenty of runway for 1.9 bugs in post.
## References
* In pursuit of #1256
* Proc Model: #5000
* https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5
## PR Checklist
* [x] Closes #6842
* [x] Closes https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5#card-50760249
* [x] Closes https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5#card-50760258
* [x] I work here
* [x] Tests added/passed
* [n/a] Requires documentation to be updated
## Detailed Description of the Pull Request / Additional comments
* I don't love the names `ControlCore` and `ControlInteractivity`. Open to other names.
* I added a `ICoreState` interface for "properties that come from the `ControlCore`, but consumers of the `TermControl` need to know". In the future, these will all need to be handled specially, because they might involve an RPC call to retrieve the info from the core (or cache it) in the window process.
* I've added more `EventArgs` to make more events proper `TypedEvent`s.
* I've changed how the TerminalApp layer requests updated TaskbarProgress state. It doesn't need to pump TermControl to raise a new event anymore.
* ~~Something that snuck into this branch in the very long history is the switch to `DCompositionCreateSurfaceHandle` for the `DxEngine`. @miniksa wrote this originally in 30b8335, I'm just finally committing it here. We'll need that in the future for the out-of-proc stuff.~~
* I reverted this in c113b65d9. We can revert _that_ commit when we want to come back to it.
* I've changed the acrylic handler a decent amount. But added tests!
* All the `ThrottledFunc` things are left in `TermControl`. Some might be able to move down into core/interactivity, but once we figure out how to use a different kind of Dispatcher (because a UI thread won't necessarily exist for those components).
* I've undoubtably messed up the merging of the locking around the appearance config stuff recently
## Validation Steps Performed
I've got a rolling list in https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/issues/6842#issuecomment-810990460 that I'm updating as I go.
2021-04-27 10:50:45 -05:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
void ControlCoreTests::TestFreeAfterClose()
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
auto [settings, conn] = _createSettingsAndConnection();
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allow `ThrottledFunc` to work on different types of dispatcher (#10187)
#### ⚠️ targets #10051
## Summary of the Pull Request
This updates our `ThrottledFunc`s to take a dispatcher parameter. This means that we can use the `Windows::UI::Core::CoreDispatcher` in the `TermControl`, where there's always a `CoreDispatcher`, and use a `Windows::System::DispatcherQueue` in `ControlCore`/`ControlInteractivity`. When running in-proc, these are always the _same thing_. However, out-of-proc, the core needs a dispatcher queue that's not tied to a UI thread (because the content proces _doesn't have a UI thread!_).
This lets us get rid of the output event, because we don't need to bubble that event out to the `TermControl` to let it throttle that update anymore.
## References
* Tear-out: #1256
* Megathread: #5000
* Project: https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5
## PR Checklist
* [x] This is a part of #1256
* [x] I work here
* [n/a] Tests added/passed
* [n/a] Requires documentation to be updated
## Detailed Description of the Pull Request / Additional comments
Fortunately, `winrt::resume_foreground` works the same on both a `CoreDispatcher` and a `DispatcherQueue`, so this wasn't too hard!
## Validation Steps Performed
This was validated in `dev/migrie/oop/the-whole-thing` (or `dev/migrie/oop/connection-factory`, I forget which), and I made sure that it worked both in-proc and x-proc. Not only that, _it wasn't any slower_!This reverts commit 04b751faa70680bf0296063deacec4657c6ff9d6.
2021-08-09 10:21:59 -05:00
|
|
|
auto core = createCore(*settings, *conn);
|
Split `TermControl` into a Core, Interactivity, and Control layer (#9820)
## Summary of the Pull Request
Brace yourselves, it's finally here. This PR does the dirty work of splitting the monolithic `TermControl` into three components. These components are:
* `ControlCore`: This encapsulates the `Terminal` instance, the `DxEngine` and `Renderer`, and the `Connection`. This is intended to everything that someone might need to stand up a terminal instance in a control, but without any regard for how the UX works.
* `ControlInteractivity`: This is a wrapper for the `ControlCore`, which holds the logic for things like double-click, right click copy/paste, selection, etc. This is intended to be a UI framework-independent abstraction. The methods this layer exposes can be called the same from both the WinUI TermControl and the WPF control.
* `TermControl`: This is the UWP control. It's got a Core and Interactivity inside it, which it uses for the actual logic of the terminal itself. TermControl's main responsibility is now
By splitting into smaller pieces, it will enable us to
* write unit tests for the `Core` and `Interactivity` bits, which we desparately need
* Combine `ControlCore` and `ControlInteractivity` in an out-of-proc core process in the future, to enable tab tearout.
However, we're not doing that work quite yet. There's still lots of work to be done to enable that, thought this is likely the biggest portion.
Ideally, this would just be methods moved wholesale from one file to another. Unfortunately, there are a bunch of cases where that didn't work as well as expected. Especially when trying to better enforce the boundary between the classes.
We've got a couple tests here that I've added. These are partially examples, and partially things I ran into while implementing this. A bunch of things from #7001 can go in now that we have this.
This PR is gonna be a huge pain to review - 38 files with 3,730 additions and 1,661 deletions is nothing to scoff at. It will also conflict 100% with anything that's targeting `TermControl`. I'm hoping we can review this over the course of the next week and just be done with it, and leave plenty of runway for 1.9 bugs in post.
## References
* In pursuit of #1256
* Proc Model: #5000
* https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5
## PR Checklist
* [x] Closes #6842
* [x] Closes https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5#card-50760249
* [x] Closes https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5#card-50760258
* [x] I work here
* [x] Tests added/passed
* [n/a] Requires documentation to be updated
## Detailed Description of the Pull Request / Additional comments
* I don't love the names `ControlCore` and `ControlInteractivity`. Open to other names.
* I added a `ICoreState` interface for "properties that come from the `ControlCore`, but consumers of the `TermControl` need to know". In the future, these will all need to be handled specially, because they might involve an RPC call to retrieve the info from the core (or cache it) in the window process.
* I've added more `EventArgs` to make more events proper `TypedEvent`s.
* I've changed how the TerminalApp layer requests updated TaskbarProgress state. It doesn't need to pump TermControl to raise a new event anymore.
* ~~Something that snuck into this branch in the very long history is the switch to `DCompositionCreateSurfaceHandle` for the `DxEngine`. @miniksa wrote this originally in 30b8335, I'm just finally committing it here. We'll need that in the future for the out-of-proc stuff.~~
* I reverted this in c113b65d9. We can revert _that_ commit when we want to come back to it.
* I've changed the acrylic handler a decent amount. But added tests!
* All the `ThrottledFunc` things are left in `TermControl`. Some might be able to move down into core/interactivity, but once we figure out how to use a different kind of Dispatcher (because a UI thread won't necessarily exist for those components).
* I've undoubtably messed up the merging of the locking around the appearance config stuff recently
## Validation Steps Performed
I've got a rolling list in https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/issues/6842#issuecomment-810990460 that I'm updating as I go.
2021-04-27 10:50:45 -05:00
|
|
|
VERIFY_IS_NOT_NULL(core);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Log::Comment(L"Close the Core, like a TermControl would");
|
|
|
|
|
core->Close();
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_IS_TRUE(true, L"Make sure that the test didn't crash when the core when out of scope");
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
void ControlCoreTests::TestFontInitializedInCtor()
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
// This is to catch a dumb programming mistake I made while working on
|
|
|
|
|
// the core/control split. We want the font initialized in the ctor,
|
|
|
|
|
// before we even get to Core::Initialize.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
auto [settings, conn] = _createSettingsAndConnection();
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// Make sure to use something dumb like "Impact" as a font name here so
|
|
|
|
|
// that you don't default to Cascadia*
|
|
|
|
|
settings->FontFace(L"Impact");
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allow `ThrottledFunc` to work on different types of dispatcher (#10187)
#### ⚠️ targets #10051
## Summary of the Pull Request
This updates our `ThrottledFunc`s to take a dispatcher parameter. This means that we can use the `Windows::UI::Core::CoreDispatcher` in the `TermControl`, where there's always a `CoreDispatcher`, and use a `Windows::System::DispatcherQueue` in `ControlCore`/`ControlInteractivity`. When running in-proc, these are always the _same thing_. However, out-of-proc, the core needs a dispatcher queue that's not tied to a UI thread (because the content proces _doesn't have a UI thread!_).
This lets us get rid of the output event, because we don't need to bubble that event out to the `TermControl` to let it throttle that update anymore.
## References
* Tear-out: #1256
* Megathread: #5000
* Project: https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5
## PR Checklist
* [x] This is a part of #1256
* [x] I work here
* [n/a] Tests added/passed
* [n/a] Requires documentation to be updated
## Detailed Description of the Pull Request / Additional comments
Fortunately, `winrt::resume_foreground` works the same on both a `CoreDispatcher` and a `DispatcherQueue`, so this wasn't too hard!
## Validation Steps Performed
This was validated in `dev/migrie/oop/the-whole-thing` (or `dev/migrie/oop/connection-factory`, I forget which), and I made sure that it worked both in-proc and x-proc. Not only that, _it wasn't any slower_!This reverts commit 04b751faa70680bf0296063deacec4657c6ff9d6.
2021-08-09 10:21:59 -05:00
|
|
|
auto core = createCore(*settings, *conn);
|
Split `TermControl` into a Core, Interactivity, and Control layer (#9820)
## Summary of the Pull Request
Brace yourselves, it's finally here. This PR does the dirty work of splitting the monolithic `TermControl` into three components. These components are:
* `ControlCore`: This encapsulates the `Terminal` instance, the `DxEngine` and `Renderer`, and the `Connection`. This is intended to everything that someone might need to stand up a terminal instance in a control, but without any regard for how the UX works.
* `ControlInteractivity`: This is a wrapper for the `ControlCore`, which holds the logic for things like double-click, right click copy/paste, selection, etc. This is intended to be a UI framework-independent abstraction. The methods this layer exposes can be called the same from both the WinUI TermControl and the WPF control.
* `TermControl`: This is the UWP control. It's got a Core and Interactivity inside it, which it uses for the actual logic of the terminal itself. TermControl's main responsibility is now
By splitting into smaller pieces, it will enable us to
* write unit tests for the `Core` and `Interactivity` bits, which we desparately need
* Combine `ControlCore` and `ControlInteractivity` in an out-of-proc core process in the future, to enable tab tearout.
However, we're not doing that work quite yet. There's still lots of work to be done to enable that, thought this is likely the biggest portion.
Ideally, this would just be methods moved wholesale from one file to another. Unfortunately, there are a bunch of cases where that didn't work as well as expected. Especially when trying to better enforce the boundary between the classes.
We've got a couple tests here that I've added. These are partially examples, and partially things I ran into while implementing this. A bunch of things from #7001 can go in now that we have this.
This PR is gonna be a huge pain to review - 38 files with 3,730 additions and 1,661 deletions is nothing to scoff at. It will also conflict 100% with anything that's targeting `TermControl`. I'm hoping we can review this over the course of the next week and just be done with it, and leave plenty of runway for 1.9 bugs in post.
## References
* In pursuit of #1256
* Proc Model: #5000
* https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5
## PR Checklist
* [x] Closes #6842
* [x] Closes https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5#card-50760249
* [x] Closes https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/projects/5#card-50760258
* [x] I work here
* [x] Tests added/passed
* [n/a] Requires documentation to be updated
## Detailed Description of the Pull Request / Additional comments
* I don't love the names `ControlCore` and `ControlInteractivity`. Open to other names.
* I added a `ICoreState` interface for "properties that come from the `ControlCore`, but consumers of the `TermControl` need to know". In the future, these will all need to be handled specially, because they might involve an RPC call to retrieve the info from the core (or cache it) in the window process.
* I've added more `EventArgs` to make more events proper `TypedEvent`s.
* I've changed how the TerminalApp layer requests updated TaskbarProgress state. It doesn't need to pump TermControl to raise a new event anymore.
* ~~Something that snuck into this branch in the very long history is the switch to `DCompositionCreateSurfaceHandle` for the `DxEngine`. @miniksa wrote this originally in 30b8335, I'm just finally committing it here. We'll need that in the future for the out-of-proc stuff.~~
* I reverted this in c113b65d9. We can revert _that_ commit when we want to come back to it.
* I've changed the acrylic handler a decent amount. But added tests!
* All the `ThrottledFunc` things are left in `TermControl`. Some might be able to move down into core/interactivity, but once we figure out how to use a different kind of Dispatcher (because a UI thread won't necessarily exist for those components).
* I've undoubtably messed up the merging of the locking around the appearance config stuff recently
## Validation Steps Performed
I've got a rolling list in https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/issues/6842#issuecomment-810990460 that I'm updating as I go.
2021-04-27 10:50:45 -05:00
|
|
|
VERIFY_IS_NOT_NULL(core);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(L"Impact", std::wstring_view{ core->_actualFont.GetFaceName() });
|
2021-04-05 11:07:55 -05:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
2021-09-02 09:59:42 -05:00
|
|
|
void ControlCoreTests::TestClearScrollback()
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
auto [settings, conn] = _createSettingsAndConnection();
|
|
|
|
|
Log::Comment(L"Create ControlCore object");
|
2021-09-20 12:08:13 -05:00
|
|
|
auto core = createCore(*settings, *conn);
|
2021-09-02 09:59:42 -05:00
|
|
|
VERIFY_IS_NOT_NULL(core);
|
|
|
|
|
_standardInit(core);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Log::Comment(L"Print 40 rows of 'Foo', and a single row of 'Bar' "
|
|
|
|
|
L"(leaving the cursor afer 'Bar')");
|
2022-04-25 17:40:47 +02:00
|
|
|
for (auto i = 0; i < 40; ++i)
|
2021-09-02 09:59:42 -05:00
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"Foo\r\n");
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"Bar");
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// We printed that 40 times, but the final \r\n bumped the view down one MORE row.
|
|
|
|
|
Log::Comment(L"Check the buffer viewport before the clear");
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(20, core->_terminal->GetViewport().Height());
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(21, core->ScrollOffset());
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(20, core->ViewHeight());
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(41, core->BufferHeight());
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Log::Comment(L"Clear the buffer");
|
|
|
|
|
core->ClearBuffer(Control::ClearBufferType::Scrollback);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Log::Comment(L"Check the buffer after the clear");
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(20, core->_terminal->GetViewport().Height());
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(0, core->ScrollOffset());
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(20, core->ViewHeight());
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(20, core->BufferHeight());
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// In this test, we can't actually check if we cleared the buffer
|
|
|
|
|
// contents. ConPTY will handle the actual clearing of the buffer
|
|
|
|
|
// contents. We can only ensure that the viewport moved when we did a
|
|
|
|
|
// clear scrollback.
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
void ControlCoreTests::TestClearScreen()
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
auto [settings, conn] = _createSettingsAndConnection();
|
|
|
|
|
Log::Comment(L"Create ControlCore object");
|
2021-09-20 12:08:13 -05:00
|
|
|
auto core = createCore(*settings, *conn);
|
2021-09-02 09:59:42 -05:00
|
|
|
VERIFY_IS_NOT_NULL(core);
|
|
|
|
|
_standardInit(core);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Log::Comment(L"Print 40 rows of 'Foo', and a single row of 'Bar' "
|
|
|
|
|
L"(leaving the cursor afer 'Bar')");
|
2022-04-25 17:40:47 +02:00
|
|
|
for (auto i = 0; i < 40; ++i)
|
2021-09-02 09:59:42 -05:00
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"Foo\r\n");
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"Bar");
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// We printed that 40 times, but the final \r\n bumped the view down one MORE row.
|
|
|
|
|
Log::Comment(L"Check the buffer viewport before the clear");
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(20, core->_terminal->GetViewport().Height());
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(21, core->ScrollOffset());
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(20, core->ViewHeight());
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(41, core->BufferHeight());
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Log::Comment(L"Clear the buffer");
|
|
|
|
|
core->ClearBuffer(Control::ClearBufferType::Screen);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Log::Comment(L"Check the buffer after the clear");
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(20, core->_terminal->GetViewport().Height());
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(21, core->ScrollOffset());
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(20, core->ViewHeight());
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(41, core->BufferHeight());
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// In this test, we can't actually check if we cleared the buffer
|
|
|
|
|
// contents. ConPTY will handle the actual clearing of the buffer
|
|
|
|
|
// contents. We can only ensure that the viewport moved when we did a
|
|
|
|
|
// clear scrollback.
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
void ControlCoreTests::TestClearAll()
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
auto [settings, conn] = _createSettingsAndConnection();
|
|
|
|
|
Log::Comment(L"Create ControlCore object");
|
2021-09-20 12:08:13 -05:00
|
|
|
auto core = createCore(*settings, *conn);
|
2021-09-02 09:59:42 -05:00
|
|
|
VERIFY_IS_NOT_NULL(core);
|
|
|
|
|
_standardInit(core);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Log::Comment(L"Print 40 rows of 'Foo', and a single row of 'Bar' "
|
|
|
|
|
L"(leaving the cursor afer 'Bar')");
|
2022-04-25 17:40:47 +02:00
|
|
|
for (auto i = 0; i < 40; ++i)
|
2021-09-02 09:59:42 -05:00
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"Foo\r\n");
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"Bar");
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// We printed that 40 times, but the final \r\n bumped the view down one MORE row.
|
|
|
|
|
Log::Comment(L"Check the buffer viewport before the clear");
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(20, core->_terminal->GetViewport().Height());
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(21, core->ScrollOffset());
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(20, core->ViewHeight());
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(41, core->BufferHeight());
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Log::Comment(L"Clear the buffer");
|
|
|
|
|
core->ClearBuffer(Control::ClearBufferType::All);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Log::Comment(L"Check the buffer after the clear");
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(20, core->_terminal->GetViewport().Height());
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(0, core->ScrollOffset());
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(20, core->ViewHeight());
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(20, core->BufferHeight());
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// In this test, we can't actually check if we cleared the buffer
|
|
|
|
|
// contents. ConPTY will handle the actual clearing of the buffer
|
|
|
|
|
// contents. We can only ensure that the viewport moved when we did a
|
|
|
|
|
// clear scrollback.
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022-11-12 23:31:10 +00:00
|
|
|
void ControlCoreTests::TestReadEntireBuffer()
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
auto [settings, conn] = _createSettingsAndConnection();
|
|
|
|
|
Log::Comment(L"Create ControlCore object");
|
|
|
|
|
auto core = createCore(*settings, *conn);
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_IS_NOT_NULL(core);
|
|
|
|
|
_standardInit(core);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Log::Comment(L"Print some text");
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"This is some text \r\n");
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"with varying amounts \r\n");
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"of whitespace \r\n");
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Log::Comment(L"Check the buffer contents");
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(L"This is some text\r\nwith varying amounts\r\nof whitespace\r\n",
|
|
|
|
|
core->ReadEntireBuffer());
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
Add the ability to select a whole command (or its output) (#14807)
Adds two new commands, `selectOutput` and `selectCommand`. These don't
do much without shell integration enabled, unfortunately. If you do
enable it, however, you can use these commands to quickly navigate the
history to select whole commands (or their output).
Some sample JSON:
```json
{ "keys": "ctrl+shift+<", "command": { "action": "selectCommand", "direction": "prev" } },
{ "keys": "ctrl+shift+>", "command": { "action": "selectCommand", "direction": "next" } },
{ "keys": "ctrl+shift+[", "command": { "action": "selectOutput", "direction": "prev" } },
{ "keys": "ctrl+shift+]", "command": { "action": "selectOutput", "direction": "next" } },
```
**Demo gifs** in
https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/issues/4588#issuecomment-1352042789
closes #4588
Tested manually.
<details>
<summary>CMD.exe user? It's dangerous to go alone! Take this.</summary>
Surely, there's a simpler way to do it, this is adapted from my own
script.
```cmd
prompt $e]133;D$e\$e]133;A$e\$e\$e]9;9;$P$e\$e[30;107m[$T]$e[97;46m$g$P$e[36;49m$g$e[0m$e[K$_$e[0m$e[94m%username%$e[0m@$e[32m%computername%$e[0m$G$e]133;B$e\
```
</details>
2023-04-20 07:34:58 -05:00
|
|
|
void _writePrompt(const winrt::com_ptr<MockConnection>& conn, const auto& path)
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"\x1b]133;D\x7");
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"\x1b]133;A\x7");
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"\x1b]9;9;");
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(path);
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"\x7");
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"PWSH ");
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(path);
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"> ");
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"\x1b]133;B\x7");
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
void ControlCoreTests::TestSelectCommandSimple()
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
auto [settings, conn] = _createSettingsAndConnection();
|
|
|
|
|
Log::Comment(L"Create ControlCore object");
|
|
|
|
|
auto core = createCore(*settings, *conn);
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_IS_NOT_NULL(core);
|
|
|
|
|
_standardInit(core);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Log::Comment(L"Print some text");
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
_writePrompt(conn, L"C:\\Windows");
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"Foo-bar");
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"\x1b]133;C\x7");
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"\r\n");
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"This is some text \r\n");
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"with varying amounts \r\n");
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"of whitespace \r\n");
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
_writePrompt(conn, L"C:\\Windows");
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Log::Comment(L"Check the buffer contents");
|
|
|
|
|
const auto& buffer = core->_terminal->GetTextBuffer();
|
|
|
|
|
const auto& cursor = buffer.GetCursor();
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
const til::point expectedCursor{ 17, 4 };
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(expectedCursor, cursor.GetPosition());
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
2022-11-12 23:31:10 +00:00
|
|
|
|
Add the ability to select a whole command (or its output) (#14807)
Adds two new commands, `selectOutput` and `selectCommand`. These don't
do much without shell integration enabled, unfortunately. If you do
enable it, however, you can use these commands to quickly navigate the
history to select whole commands (or their output).
Some sample JSON:
```json
{ "keys": "ctrl+shift+<", "command": { "action": "selectCommand", "direction": "prev" } },
{ "keys": "ctrl+shift+>", "command": { "action": "selectCommand", "direction": "next" } },
{ "keys": "ctrl+shift+[", "command": { "action": "selectOutput", "direction": "prev" } },
{ "keys": "ctrl+shift+]", "command": { "action": "selectOutput", "direction": "next" } },
```
**Demo gifs** in
https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/issues/4588#issuecomment-1352042789
closes #4588
Tested manually.
<details>
<summary>CMD.exe user? It's dangerous to go alone! Take this.</summary>
Surely, there's a simpler way to do it, this is adapted from my own
script.
```cmd
prompt $e]133;D$e\$e]133;A$e\$e\$e]9;9;$P$e\$e[30;107m[$T]$e[97;46m$g$P$e[36;49m$g$e[0m$e[K$_$e[0m$e[94m%username%$e[0m@$e[32m%computername%$e[0m$G$e]133;B$e\
```
</details>
2023-04-20 07:34:58 -05:00
|
|
|
VERIFY_IS_FALSE(core->HasSelection());
|
|
|
|
|
core->SelectCommand(true);
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_IS_TRUE(core->HasSelection());
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
const auto& start = core->_terminal->GetSelectionAnchor();
|
|
|
|
|
const auto& end = core->_terminal->GetSelectionEnd();
|
|
|
|
|
const til::point expectedStart{ 17, 0 };
|
|
|
|
|
const til::point expectedEnd{ 23, 0 };
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(expectedStart, start);
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(expectedEnd, end);
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
core->_terminal->ClearSelection();
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"Boo-far");
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"\x1b]133;C\x7");
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_IS_FALSE(core->HasSelection());
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
const til::point expectedCursor{ 24, 4 };
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(expectedCursor, cursor.GetPosition());
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_IS_FALSE(core->HasSelection());
|
|
|
|
|
core->SelectCommand(true);
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_IS_TRUE(core->HasSelection());
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
const auto& start = core->_terminal->GetSelectionAnchor();
|
|
|
|
|
const auto& end = core->_terminal->GetSelectionEnd();
|
|
|
|
|
const til::point expectedStart{ 17, 4 };
|
|
|
|
|
const til::point expectedEnd{ 23, 4 };
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(expectedStart, start);
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(expectedEnd, end);
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
core->SelectCommand(true);
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_IS_TRUE(core->HasSelection());
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
const auto& start = core->_terminal->GetSelectionAnchor();
|
|
|
|
|
const auto& end = core->_terminal->GetSelectionEnd();
|
|
|
|
|
const til::point expectedStart{ 17, 0 };
|
|
|
|
|
const til::point expectedEnd{ 23, 0 };
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(expectedStart, start);
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(expectedEnd, end);
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
core->SelectCommand(false);
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_IS_TRUE(core->HasSelection());
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
const auto& start = core->_terminal->GetSelectionAnchor();
|
|
|
|
|
const auto& end = core->_terminal->GetSelectionEnd();
|
|
|
|
|
const til::point expectedStart{ 17, 4 };
|
|
|
|
|
const til::point expectedEnd{ 23, 4 };
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(expectedStart, start);
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(expectedEnd, end);
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
void ControlCoreTests::TestSelectOutputSimple()
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
auto [settings, conn] = _createSettingsAndConnection();
|
|
|
|
|
Log::Comment(L"Create ControlCore object");
|
|
|
|
|
auto core = createCore(*settings, *conn);
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_IS_NOT_NULL(core);
|
|
|
|
|
_standardInit(core);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Log::Comment(L"Print some text");
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
_writePrompt(conn, L"C:\\Windows");
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"Foo-bar");
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"\x1b]133;C\x7");
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"\r\n");
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"This is some text \r\n");
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"with varying amounts \r\n");
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"of whitespace \r\n");
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
_writePrompt(conn, L"C:\\Windows");
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Log::Comment(L"Check the buffer contents");
|
|
|
|
|
const auto& buffer = core->_terminal->GetTextBuffer();
|
|
|
|
|
const auto& cursor = buffer.GetCursor();
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
const til::point expectedCursor{ 17, 4 };
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(expectedCursor, cursor.GetPosition());
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_IS_FALSE(core->HasSelection());
|
|
|
|
|
core->SelectOutput(true);
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_IS_TRUE(core->HasSelection());
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
const auto& start = core->_terminal->GetSelectionAnchor();
|
2024-05-01 10:06:33 -05:00
|
|
|
const auto& end = core->_terminal->GetSelectionEnd();
|
|
|
|
|
const til::point expectedStart{ 24, 0 }; // The character after the prompt
|
|
|
|
|
const til::point expectedEnd{ 21, 3 }; // x = the end of the text
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(expectedStart, start);
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(expectedEnd, end);
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
2024-05-13 12:36:27 -05:00
|
|
|
void ControlCoreTests::TestCommandContext()
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
auto [settings, conn] = _createSettingsAndConnection();
|
|
|
|
|
Log::Comment(L"Create ControlCore object");
|
|
|
|
|
auto core = createCore(*settings, *conn);
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_IS_NOT_NULL(core);
|
|
|
|
|
_standardInit(core);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Log::Comment(L"Print some text");
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
_writePrompt(conn, L"C:\\Windows");
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"Foo-bar");
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"\x1b]133;C\x7");
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"\r\n");
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"This is some text \r\n");
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"with varying amounts \r\n");
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"of whitespace \r\n");
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
_writePrompt(conn, L"C:\\Windows");
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Log::Comment(L"Check the command context");
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
const WEX::TestExecution::DisableVerifyExceptions disableExceptionsScope;
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
auto historyContext{ core->CommandHistory() };
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(1u, historyContext.History().Size());
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(L"", historyContext.CurrentCommandline());
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Log::Comment(L"Write 'Bar' to the command...");
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"Bar");
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
auto historyContext{ core->CommandHistory() };
|
|
|
|
|
// Bar shouldn't be in the history, it should be the current command
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(1u, historyContext.History().Size());
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(L"Bar", historyContext.CurrentCommandline());
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Log::Comment(L"then delete it");
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"\b \b");
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"\b \b");
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"\b \b");
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
auto historyContext{ core->CommandHistory() };
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(1u, historyContext.History().Size());
|
|
|
|
|
// The current commandline is now empty
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(L"", historyContext.CurrentCommandline());
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
2024-05-01 10:06:33 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
void ControlCoreTests::TestSelectOutputScrolling()
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
auto [settings, conn] = _createSettingsAndConnection();
|
|
|
|
|
Log::Comment(L"Create ControlCore object");
|
|
|
|
|
auto core = createCore(*settings, *conn);
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_IS_NOT_NULL(core);
|
|
|
|
|
_standardInit(core);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Log::Comment(L"Print some text");
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
_writePrompt(conn, L"C:\\Windows"); // row 0
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"Foo-bar"); // row 0
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"\x1b]133;C\x7");
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"\r\n");
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"This is some text \r\n"); // row 1
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"with varying amounts \r\n"); // row 2
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"of whitespace \r\n"); // row 3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
_writePrompt(conn, L"C:\\Windows"); // row 4
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"gci");
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"\x1b]133;C\x7");
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"\r\n");
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// enough to scroll
|
|
|
|
|
for (auto i = 0; i < 30; i++) // row 5-34
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"-a--- 2/8/2024 9:47 README\r\n");
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
_writePrompt(conn, L"C:\\Windows");
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Log::Comment(L"Check the buffer contents");
|
|
|
|
|
const auto& buffer = core->_terminal->GetTextBuffer();
|
|
|
|
|
const auto& cursor = buffer.GetCursor();
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
const til::point expectedCursor{ 17, 35 };
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(expectedCursor, cursor.GetPosition());
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_IS_FALSE(core->HasSelection());
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// The second mark is the first one we'll see
|
|
|
|
|
core->SelectOutput(true);
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_IS_TRUE(core->HasSelection());
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
const auto& start = core->_terminal->GetSelectionAnchor();
|
|
|
|
|
const auto& end = core->_terminal->GetSelectionEnd();
|
|
|
|
|
const til::point expectedStart{ 20, 4 }; // The character after the prompt
|
|
|
|
|
const til::point expectedEnd{ 26, 34 }; // x = the end of the text
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(expectedStart, start);
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(expectedEnd, end);
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
core->SelectOutput(true);
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_IS_TRUE(core->HasSelection());
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
const auto& start = core->_terminal->GetSelectionAnchor();
|
|
|
|
|
const auto& end = core->_terminal->GetSelectionEnd();
|
|
|
|
|
const til::point expectedStart{ 24, 0 }; // The character after the prompt
|
|
|
|
|
const til::point expectedEnd{ 21, 3 }; // x = the end of the text
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(expectedStart, start);
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(expectedEnd, end);
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
void ControlCoreTests::TestSelectOutputExactWrap()
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
// Just like the TestSelectOutputScrolling test, but these lines will
|
|
|
|
|
// exactly wrap to the right edge of the buffer, to catch a edge case
|
|
|
|
|
// present in `ControlCore::_selectSpan`
|
|
|
|
|
auto [settings, conn] = _createSettingsAndConnection();
|
|
|
|
|
Log::Comment(L"Create ControlCore object");
|
|
|
|
|
auto core = createCore(*settings, *conn);
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_IS_NOT_NULL(core);
|
|
|
|
|
_standardInit(core);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Log::Comment(L"Print some text");
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
_writePrompt(conn, L"C:\\Windows"); // row 0
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"Foo-bar"); // row 0
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"\x1b]133;C\x7");
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"\r\n");
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"This is some text \r\n"); // row 1
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"with varying amounts \r\n"); // row 2
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"of whitespace \r\n"); // row 3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
_writePrompt(conn, L"C:\\Windows"); // row 4
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"gci");
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"\x1b]133;C\x7");
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"\r\n");
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// enough to scroll
|
|
|
|
|
for (auto i = 0; i < 30; i++) // row 5-35
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
conn->WriteInput(L"-a--- 2/8/2024 9:47 README.md\r\n");
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
_writePrompt(conn, L"C:\\Windows");
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Log::Comment(L"Check the buffer contents");
|
|
|
|
|
const auto& buffer = core->_terminal->GetTextBuffer();
|
|
|
|
|
const auto& cursor = buffer.GetCursor();
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
const til::point expectedCursor{ 17, 35 };
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(expectedCursor, cursor.GetPosition());
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_IS_FALSE(core->HasSelection());
|
|
|
|
|
// The second mark is the first one we'll see
|
|
|
|
|
core->SelectOutput(true);
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_IS_TRUE(core->HasSelection());
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
const auto& start = core->_terminal->GetSelectionAnchor();
|
|
|
|
|
const auto& end = core->_terminal->GetSelectionEnd();
|
|
|
|
|
const til::point expectedStart{ 20, 4 }; // The character after the prompt
|
|
|
|
|
const til::point expectedEnd{ 29, 34 }; // x = the end of the text
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(expectedStart, start);
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(expectedEnd, end);
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
core->SelectOutput(true);
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_IS_TRUE(core->HasSelection());
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
const auto& start = core->_terminal->GetSelectionAnchor();
|
Add the ability to select a whole command (or its output) (#14807)
Adds two new commands, `selectOutput` and `selectCommand`. These don't
do much without shell integration enabled, unfortunately. If you do
enable it, however, you can use these commands to quickly navigate the
history to select whole commands (or their output).
Some sample JSON:
```json
{ "keys": "ctrl+shift+<", "command": { "action": "selectCommand", "direction": "prev" } },
{ "keys": "ctrl+shift+>", "command": { "action": "selectCommand", "direction": "next" } },
{ "keys": "ctrl+shift+[", "command": { "action": "selectOutput", "direction": "prev" } },
{ "keys": "ctrl+shift+]", "command": { "action": "selectOutput", "direction": "next" } },
```
**Demo gifs** in
https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/issues/4588#issuecomment-1352042789
closes #4588
Tested manually.
<details>
<summary>CMD.exe user? It's dangerous to go alone! Take this.</summary>
Surely, there's a simpler way to do it, this is adapted from my own
script.
```cmd
prompt $e]133;D$e\$e]133;A$e\$e\$e]9;9;$P$e\$e[30;107m[$T]$e[97;46m$g$P$e[36;49m$g$e[0m$e[K$_$e[0m$e[94m%username%$e[0m@$e[32m%computername%$e[0m$G$e]133;B$e\
```
</details>
2023-04-20 07:34:58 -05:00
|
|
|
const auto& end = core->_terminal->GetSelectionEnd();
|
|
|
|
|
const til::point expectedStart{ 24, 0 }; // The character after the prompt
|
Rewrite how marks are stored & add reflow (#16937)
This is pretty much a huge refactoring of how marks are stored in the
buffer.
Gone is the list of `ScrollMark`s in the buffer that store regions of
text as points marking the ends. Those would be nigh impossible to
reflow nicely.
Instead, we're going to use `TextAttribute`s to store the kind of output
we've got - `Prompt`, `Command`, `Output`, or, the default, `None`.
Those already reflow nicely!
But we also need to store things like, the exit code for the command.
That's why we've now added `ScrollbarData` to `ROW`s. There's really
only going to be one prompt->output on a single row. So, we only need to
store one ScrollbarData per-row. When a command ends, we can just go
update the mark on the row that started that command.
But iterating over the whole buffer to find the next/previous
prompt/command/output region sounds complicated. So, to avoid everyone
needing to do some variant of that, we've added `MarkExtents` (which is
literally just the same mark structure as before). TextBuffer can figure
out where all the mark regions are, and hand that back to callers. This
allows ControlCore to be basically unchanged.
_But collecting up all the regions for all the marks sounds expensive!
We need to update the scrollbar frequently, we can't just collect those
up every time!_ No we can't! But we also don't need to. The scrollbar
doesn't need to know where all the marks start and end and if they have
commands and this and that - no. We only need to know the rows that have
marks on them. So, we've now also got `ScrollMark` to represent just a
mark on a scrollbar at a specific row on the buffer. We can get those
quickly.
* [x] I added a bunch of tests for this.
* [x] I played with it and it feels good, even after a reflow (finally)
* See:
* #11000
* #15057 (I'm not marking this as closed. The stacked PR will close
this, when I move marks to Stable)
2024-04-05 13:16:10 -07:00
|
|
|
const til::point expectedEnd{ 21, 3 }; // x = the end of the text
|
Add the ability to select a whole command (or its output) (#14807)
Adds two new commands, `selectOutput` and `selectCommand`. These don't
do much without shell integration enabled, unfortunately. If you do
enable it, however, you can use these commands to quickly navigate the
history to select whole commands (or their output).
Some sample JSON:
```json
{ "keys": "ctrl+shift+<", "command": { "action": "selectCommand", "direction": "prev" } },
{ "keys": "ctrl+shift+>", "command": { "action": "selectCommand", "direction": "next" } },
{ "keys": "ctrl+shift+[", "command": { "action": "selectOutput", "direction": "prev" } },
{ "keys": "ctrl+shift+]", "command": { "action": "selectOutput", "direction": "next" } },
```
**Demo gifs** in
https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/issues/4588#issuecomment-1352042789
closes #4588
Tested manually.
<details>
<summary>CMD.exe user? It's dangerous to go alone! Take this.</summary>
Surely, there's a simpler way to do it, this is adapted from my own
script.
```cmd
prompt $e]133;D$e\$e]133;A$e\$e\$e]9;9;$P$e\$e[30;107m[$T]$e[97;46m$g$P$e[36;49m$g$e[0m$e[K$_$e[0m$e[94m%username%$e[0m@$e[32m%computername%$e[0m$G$e]133;B$e\
```
</details>
2023-04-20 07:34:58 -05:00
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(expectedStart, start);
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(expectedEnd, end);
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
2023-08-14 07:37:13 -05:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
void ControlCoreTests::TestSimpleClickSelection()
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
// Create a simple selection with the mouse, then click somewhere else,
|
|
|
|
|
// and confirm the selection got updated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
auto [settings, conn] = _createSettingsAndConnection();
|
|
|
|
|
Log::Comment(L"Create ControlCore object");
|
|
|
|
|
auto core = createCore(*settings, *conn);
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_IS_NOT_NULL(core);
|
|
|
|
|
_standardInit(core);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// Here, we're using the UpdateSelectionMarkers as a stand-in to check
|
|
|
|
|
// if the selection got updated with the renderer. Standing up a whole
|
|
|
|
|
// dummy renderer for this test would be not very ergonomic. Instead, we
|
|
|
|
|
// are relying on ControlCore::_updateSelectionUI both
|
|
|
|
|
// TriggerSelection()'ing and also rasing this event
|
|
|
|
|
bool expectedSelectionUpdate = false;
|
|
|
|
|
bool gotSelectionUpdate = false;
|
|
|
|
|
core->UpdateSelectionMarkers([&](auto&& /*sender*/, auto&& /*args*/) {
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_IS_TRUE(expectedSelectionUpdate);
|
|
|
|
|
expectedSelectionUpdate = false;
|
|
|
|
|
gotSelectionUpdate = true;
|
|
|
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
auto needToCopy = false;
|
|
|
|
|
expectedSelectionUpdate = true;
|
|
|
|
|
core->LeftClickOnTerminal(til::point{ 1, 1 },
|
|
|
|
|
1,
|
|
|
|
|
false,
|
|
|
|
|
true,
|
|
|
|
|
false,
|
|
|
|
|
needToCopy);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_IS_TRUE(core->HasSelection());
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
const auto& start = core->_terminal->GetSelectionAnchor();
|
|
|
|
|
const auto& end = core->_terminal->GetSelectionEnd();
|
|
|
|
|
const til::point expectedStart{ 1, 1 };
|
|
|
|
|
const til::point expectedEnd{ 1, 1 };
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(expectedStart, start);
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(expectedEnd, end);
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_IS_TRUE(gotSelectionUpdate);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
expectedSelectionUpdate = true;
|
|
|
|
|
core->LeftClickOnTerminal(til::point{ 1, 2 },
|
|
|
|
|
1,
|
|
|
|
|
false,
|
|
|
|
|
true,
|
|
|
|
|
false,
|
|
|
|
|
needToCopy);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_IS_TRUE(core->HasSelection());
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
|
const auto& start = core->_terminal->GetSelectionAnchor();
|
|
|
|
|
const auto& end = core->_terminal->GetSelectionEnd();
|
|
|
|
|
const til::point expectedStart{ 1, 1 };
|
|
|
|
|
const til::point expectedEnd{ 1, 2 };
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(expectedStart, start);
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_ARE_EQUAL(expectedEnd, end);
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
VERIFY_IS_TRUE(gotSelectionUpdate);
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
2021-04-05 11:07:55 -05:00
|
|
|
}
|