Project

General

Profile

Forums » Help »

Differentiating initial key press from repeat code with WInteractWidget::keyWentDown()

Added by Cameron Angus about 10 years ago

Can this be done in any way? Is the information available somewhere?

To clarify, by repeat code, I mean when a signal is generated repeatedly at some frequency while a key is held down. I want to react only to the initial key press.


Replies (5)

RE: Differentiating initial key press from repeat code with WInteractWidget::keyWentDown() - Added by Cameron Angus about 10 years ago

Hi Wim.

I had assumed from the name of the signal that this was indeed what I wanted. However, this signal is emitted repeatedly when a key is held down over a period of time, and as far as I can see, there is no way to determine which it was - the initial key down, or a repeat.

I guess I can keep track of a flag myself for every key of interest, but I'm not even sure if that would work properly in the case that focus is changed while a key is still being held down.

Cameron.

RE: Differentiating initial key press from repeat code with WInteractWidget::keyWentDown() - Added by Vincenzo Romano about 10 years ago

I admit yours is a weird situation.

As keys can repeat more than once and the keyWentDown() is generated by the autorepeat (this is why it's been invented), I think it's almost impossible to accurately detect autorepeats from actually typed keys without precise assistance from the client OS and hardware.

Maybe with fine-grained timing you could do it, but that should happen client-side.

RE: Differentiating initial key press from repeat code with WInteractWidget::keyWentDown() - Added by Wim Dumon about 10 years ago

Cameron,

I'm mistaken indeed. keyWentDown is also fired on auto-repeat. Maybe look for the sequence down-up-down? Not sure if this has special cases...

Best regards,

Wim.

RE: Differentiating initial key press from repeat code with WInteractWidget::keyWentDown() - Added by Cameron Angus about 10 years ago

Thanks for the feedback guys. Yep, well, shouldn't be too difficult to fudge it for my current purposes, anyway. Luckily it's not super critical.

    (1-5/5)