-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 28.6k
Move semantic-related bindings to SemanticsBinding #121289
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It is weird that we reuse the same interface for handles from two different object. Do you know why we need to add an ensureSemantics to the SemanticsBinding?
or PipelineOwner can do the logic in the construction and put dispose logic to one callback and reuse the SemanticsHandle class directly?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
See answer to previous question.
Can you elaborate what you mean by this?
This is mostly here for backwards compatibility. PipelineOwner had an
ensureSemantics
method that is getting some good use, I didn't want to remove it just yet. But like I said in the other comment, we also need something that manages the state of semantics on/off globally outside of individual PipelineOwners.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The objects have the same purpose, though. They are both handles to denote your interest in semantics. One on a global level, the other on a per-PipelineOwner level.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for explanation, yes this make sense.
What i meant to reuse the SemanticsHandle class is to do something like this
but you will have to expose the constructor.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
One more question though, will we have use case that some views enabled semantics but not others? I don't think there is platform that can turn on accessibility for a certain window only.
If that is the case, maybe we should deprecate the pipelineOwner.ensureSemantics, or redirect the call to SemanticsBinding?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I see. I don't think I want to make it easy for people to instantiate SemanticsHandle because doing so is more or less meaningless. A handle only has meaning if it was obtained from one of the
ensureSemantics
methods.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I can't think of any, really.
I am considering this for a future change. The PipelineOwner will get a bigger refactoring soon to make it fit for multi view.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
sounds good to me