On Mon, Jan 15, 2007 at 01:37:35PM +0100, Anthony Brown wrote: > On Sun, Jan 14, 2007 at 07:33:42PM +0000, David Tweed wrote: > > Anyway, the nice thing about title windows is that they provide > > the SAME "visual interface" for various applications. For example, > > my xterms are configured with only a $ as the visible prompt and > > put the current directory into the window title; otherwise I'd have to > > find the line with the cursor on to find out what the current directory is. > > With vim, if the current file isn't put in the title I've got to find it > > on the line at the bottom of the screen. With an document viewer > > (eg, evince, etc) I've got to open the file menu. Etc. > > > > The point I'm trying to make here is that there's a different thing > > to do to find out the window title for each application, rather than > > one global action for all the applications. That's why window > > managers (& to an extent toolkits) exist right? So each application > > doesn't define it's own way of performing common acitons like > > moving windows, etc. > > > > Anway, I wouldn't object to titles being configured out by default > > but I don't see much actual practical gain (as opposed to LOC bragging) > > in removing the code. > > I agree that window title bars remain very useful, even if they are > annoying sometimes for small windows. I do like the added visual clue > for focus with a different border colour. I see now that the status area > has the same colour as the unselected tags. In previous versions my > colours for the status area were the reverse from those for unselected > tags, making the status area stand out more. Maybe you could consider > such a "reverse video" scheme for the status area? (I admit this depends > on the colour scheme one uses)
If you need something like that, it's easy to patch the specific line. Regards, -- Anselm R. Garbe >< http://suckless.org/~arg/ >< GPG key: 0D73F361
