Is this the same as the {h,v}ratio patch?
On Thu, Aug 02, 2007 at 07:59:59PM +0200, Anselm R. Garbe wrote:
> I have a working algorithm already called rtile. See here for
> how the new tile is intended to work (on the screenshot you see
> an rtile algorithm with ratio 0.7, this means that each
> successing client is 70% of the previous one, same with the
> stack, it has 70% of the master width.
>
> http://www.suckless.org/shots/dwm-rtile-20070802.png
>
> Regards,
> Anselm
>
> On Wed, Aug 01, 2007 at 05:40:47PM +0200, Anselm R. Garbe wrote:
> > When thinking about a golden ratio tile, I got the idea to
> > replace masterw with a general ratio value. A ratio of 50[:50]
> > means that master and stacking area are equally resized, same
> > with the heights of tiled windows. If the ratio is 60[:40] the
> > master area is 60% and the stacking area is 40% of the screen size
> > (similiar to the current behavior). But the ratio also has effect
> > to the height of all tiled windows. A 60[:40] ratio means, that
> > each successing window will be around 20% smaller in height than
> > the previous one.
> >
> > If the ratio is choosed 40[:60] this means, that the master
> > width will be smaller than the stack width, and that top-windows
> > on the stack will have a smaller height than the bottom-windows.
> >
> > The basic idea is quite easy to grasp. Currently I work on a new
> > tile() algorithm which will provide the described funtionality.
> >
> > I'm curios how this will feel in reality.
> >
> > Regards,
> > --
> > Anselm R. Garbe >< http://www.suckless.org/ >< GPG key: 0D73F361
> >
>
> --
> Anselm R. Garbe >< http://www.suckless.org/ >< GPG key: 0D73F361
>
