* [07/20/01 11:57] Of all the gin joints in all the towns in all the world,
* Jeff Raven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> walks into mine and says:
> On Thu, Jul 19, 2001 at 04:01:39PM -0500, Ben Jansens wrote:
> > Ok, I've given this some thought and talked this over with
> > others, and I think this is the best idea we've come up with:
> >
> > Currently, when bbkeys fires the Next Window message, blackbox
> > catches the message, and switches to the next window. The same
> > functionality is used for catching this event as for when the
> > button on the toolbar is pressed.
> >
> > I propose that instead of blackbox handling the window cycling
> > call from bbkeys (it should still internally handle the toolbar
> > one), it instead passes it to the bbcycle application. This
> > application could cycle windows in any fashion seen fit, classic
> > style, KDE style, or any style devised at a later date.
>
> Sorry, but it's not gonna happen...
>
> -- It will consume unnecessary system resources (bbkeys itself
> adds more than enough overhead).
>
> -- The more sophisticated window cycling methods need more
> information than blackbox's CycleWindow message provides
> (for instance, in Windows-style cycling it's important to
> know whether the Mod key was released in between cycle
> events). This means that the blackbox protocol would have
> to be changed to include all the possible info that bbcycle
> would require (and possibly have to be changed each time
> bbcycle added a new cycling), and in turn bbkeys would
> have to be changed in order to provide blackbox with all
> that information.
>
> -- It doubles the network trips it takes to cycle a window.
>
> -- On a looking-into-the-future note, once I manage to slog
> my way through my blackbox TODO list and get to adding NET
> WM support, the CycleWindow message will disappear. The
> only way to cycle windows using the NET WM spec is by
> raising and focusing the appropriate window yourself (so
> bbkeys would be forced to do the cycling itself, instead
> of asking blackbox to do it).
>
> > I'd especially really like to hear what you core developers think
> > of this, since it encrouches on your territory somewhat :-) but I
> > believe this would really improve the window manager and keeps most
> > of the work out of the main codebase.
>
> I still think it's far easier to do this within bbkeys itself.
>
> Jeff Raven
>
I completely agree. As I just said in another e-mail, this is
added/enhanced functionality to an existing application, not completely
new functionality.
--
----%<----------%<----
Jason Kasper (vanRijn)
bash$ :(){ :|:&};:
Numbers 6:24-26
