-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 33
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
Move element out of window and then to a invalid location don't reset the move feedback #1426
Comments
From what I can see this is actually a feedback issue as another operation properly resets the element to the correct position. I can reproduce this by dragging the mouse outside the window, releasing the mouse button and then clicking on another element. When a selection occurs, we are stuck, is that the same behavior for you? If so, I can have a look at it, we probably just need to listen to the selection in the feedback listener and dispose the feedback. |
I'm not 100% sure why this happens... |
- Handle mouse down if we should be dragging as mouse up - Reset feedback if selection has changed -- Ensure element does not have to be selected to revert move -- Add method for listeners to selection service Fixes eclipse-glsp/glsp#1426
@ivy-lli True, I can also see that being triggered sometimes. I tried a fix in eclipse-glsp/glsp-client#399, maybe you have some time to look at it and double check whether it also works for your use case. |
Quickly checked our impl with the @eclipse-glsp/[email protected]. Seems to work. Thanks 👍 |
If an element is dragged out of the window and then is placed on an invalid position, the MoveFeedback is not correctly reset.
But also only if you click on the invalid area (see workflow example where the last click is on the other element).
Strangely if the new position is valid then everything seems to work.
our glsp editor (no placement in the negative area):
glsp workflow example with enabled NoOverlapMovementRestrictor:
Honestly not sure how I can fix this. Maybe you have an idea here @martin-fleck-at?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: