On Sun, Jul 12, 2009 at 3:39 AM, Preben Randhol<[email protected]> wrote: > Hope you are not doing any real life coding...
Sorry to dash your hopes. > So per-tag is weird and bizarre? Not that every time one go to tag > X one need to press Modx-M and then when returning to tag Y you have to > press Modx-t? Out of 365 days per year, let say one use dwm 300 and > changing tag about 30 times per day. That comes to 90 000 useless > keystrokes. Is this the "dynamic" you talked about? Those are some fabulous imaginary numbers that don't really apply. If I found myself doing work like that I'd probably use a nice workspace-based window manager. Instead, I don't have a set 'layout', and I just add and remove clients and groups of clients to and from the stack. If I had to keep in my head which layout was applied to each of my ten tags, I'd have to think about my window management, and the reason I use dwm is to let the computer do that for me. > If you have a huge screen with high resolution you probably can work in > tiled only, but not so one a notebook or a smaller monitor. Older versions of dwm's description specified that it was for high-resolution screens. I wish they'd put that back. You *can* buy high-resolution notebooks. I have one. > Well, I would say that support for multiple monitors should then not be > part of dwm, but be a patchwork as it is bizarre to need multiple > hardware when we have tags. I don't think you understand tags. > Right answer is to make the code readable and modular. Thank you for your agreement on this matter. -- # Kurt H Maier
