Jump to content

Browser spawn uses bad programming idiom


FatBytestard

Recommended Posts

When a DL is complete and the user selects "Open containing folder", the choice to spawn that file browsing window in a specific size is a VERY bad programming technique. Why? Because if one then subsequently closes said browser, the size gets kept.

Is it not possible simply to spawn the browser WITHOUT setting a specific window size? This is a very bad practice.

My screen is very high res, and your sized spawn opens up a window not much larger than a post card, which I then have to make manipulations to, just to see the file data, and I have to re-size everything before I close it, or keep another browser open so that your small window and field size settings do not mess up MY chosen settings. If you could simply make it spawn a window at the location, and let the user's window size settings be retained, you will have learned a crucial lesson in programming. Perhaps this was just an oversight, but FORCING a specific window size in a spawned window is a very bad practice if it was intentional. Simply executing the spawn allows the user to retain his own window set-ups.

Again, please consider making this change in your next iteration of your otherwise great program. Since this is not an actual bug, even though it bugs the begezus out of me, I did not post it in the bugs area.

BTW, first post. Thanks for the membership, and sorry that my first post is a critique, but what are friends for, eh? :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When µTorrent launches an Explorer window via "Open Containing Folder," it executes with "%windir%\explorer.exe" /select,"PATH" if it's a single-file torrent, and "%windir%\explorer.exe" "PATH" if it's a multi-file torrent.

There is absolutely nothing about window size in the commandline, and as you've vehemently discussed, there is no reason for there to be. And there definitely isn't any reason for µTorrent to manually force a window size after Explorer opens either (it wouldn't even make sense).

If you want to blame anyone, blame Microsoft. Need proof? Perform Start > Run > "%windir%\explorer.exe" "PATH" yourself, and then perform Start > Run > "PATH".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PROBLEM SOLVED!

Despite using your proof, and getting a 'normal' window, utorrent continued to spawn a small window. SO... I tried to open one, *then* resize it and close it, and re-open it again right after. The window remembered the size setting. So, I conclude that the spawn string is unique enough that windows was retaining the small window size, which I guess I had never previously resized. So all is well. My response below is mostly moot. My bad.

Funny that such spawns from any other app I use does not size the window, but utorrent invariably does.

Maybe it is due to opening it within the utorrent window frame that causes it. Whatever it is, it is most certainly tied to this app, as no other program I use has this issue. Perhaps it is some default setting in the compiler/compile session that you are unaware of. All I know is that this app ALWAYS does this regardless of what I do. I will try it with utorrent maximized and see if it persists. From you reply, it appears that you indeed do nothing to cause this, but nonetheless, it still does happen.

I wonder if anyone else has this happening to them. I am in Vista Ultimate, I will try it from Windows 7 Ultimate.

Weird thing, considering the way you say it gets spawned. I'll let you know what result I get from a Windows 7 session.

Quoted suggestion:

If you want to blame anyone, blame Microsoft. Need proof? Perform Start > Run > "%windir%\explorer.exe" "PATH" yourself, and then perform Start > Run > "PATH".

It was not "vehement" as you stated, nor was it "blame". It was a valid assumption considering that your app is the only one that does it... still. The only thing I was remotely vehement about is that such practices are "bad programming", which it is. Since you are not doing that explicitly, you are not guilty of bad programming practice. We are back to square one.

Executing this "proof" spawns a file browser window that carries my normal sizing characteristics. Utorrent still opens up a small window. So what that is proof of is that it is NOT Microsoft.

So, if it is Microsoft, perhaps your syntax string derived upon selecting the "Open Containing Folder" menu item gets constructed differently than the code segment you gave, because it most certainly sizes the window as if I am on a 640x480 machine. What a weird phenomena, since you say it isn't from your end. Thanks for the reply. The "proof" actually gives me a normal window, so I am still unresolved. It could still very much so, be Microsoft. Sorry that it felt like I was stepping on your toes, but I was sure that utorrent did it, because utorrent is the only app I have that does it... still. :-]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That you assumed µTorrent was responsible means you placed blame on it; I wasn't trying to imply that you held any ill regard toward µTorrent just because of that. I called it "blame" because I was calling a cat a cat -- nothing more, nothing less.

Your post read with vehemence (passion, not anger) to me because you kept going on about programming practices when simply saying that it's forcing a set size would be enough to get the point across for most people. Capitalization on various words only makes it appear that much more so. And again, it wasn't like I was saying vehement discussion is a bad thing. I was simply making clear that your strong opinion on the matter was duly noted, that I agreed, and that µTorrent definitely isn't the one stepping over that fine usability boundary.

http://ultima.utorrent.googlepages.com/Explorer_Issue.html

Screencast of "proof" in action. But oh well, as long as you've already solved your problem, good enough. Indeed, it's Windows trying to be user friendly... by remembering different settings for the same folder (which just happens to detract from the goal), hence my Microsoft "blame" (placing responsibility where it lies).

Toes weren't stepped on, though words may have been tripped over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...