On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 10:04 AM, Anselm R. Garbe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Wed, May 07, 2008 at 07:57:44AM +0200, Tuncer Ayaz wrote: > > On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 5:01 PM, Anselm R. Garbe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Tue, May 06, 2008 at 12:14:10AM +0200, Henrik Holst wrote: > > > > I think an implementation of EWMH would make it possible to remove the > > > > dwm panel (the one that reads stdin and displays it) from dwm code > base. > > > > > > > > In that way dwm would be smaller (or maybe just break even) and more > > > > symmetric with how dmenu is fitted to the equation today. It would > also > > > > allowe the user to choose whatever kind of "panel" he or she wants. > That > > > > is an escape and dpanel (or some other name maybe) would not have to > be > > > > counted in the ridicules 2 kloc limit. :P > > > > > > > > But seriously, EWMH support with struts and all, should be on the top > of > > > > the list for dwm. EWMH is too important to be left to forks. > > > > > > > > Something for 5.0? > > > > > > EWMH is evil. I see reasons for people arguing to get rid of the > > > status text processing code in dwm, but the tagging approach is > > > a too integral part of dwm which heavily depends on the bar. > > > > > > Thus there is no way to get rid of the bar. The overhead > > > introduced by EWMH and a EWMH-driven bar for the tagging concept > > > would make the code base much more complex. > > > > > > Currently I'm at a stage to reconsider features for removal > > > again. Esp. DEFGEOM seems to have a lot of potential for > > > simplification(s). > > > > +1 on status text processing removal (it just eats cycles > > and makes life harder while trying to concentrate on > > real work) > > > > +1 on keeping a possibility to have the tags part of the bar > > for people who need it > > > > +1 on keeping a way to add a status bar somehow without having > > it in dwm but I'm not sure how that would be combined with the > > tags support. > > > > As there are presumably Xmonad devs/users lurking here > > I'm curious how the tags part in > > http://haskell.org/sitewiki/images/b/b2/Byorgey-config.png > > is accomplished. is it dzen or xmobar which has a way to > > talk to Xmonad? > > > > _it might be remove status bar functionality and add a way > > to achieve it optionally than to let it be as it is right > > now depending on how it would be achieved_ > > For those who are basically interested in using dzen as status > processor I could consider to disable the status text processing > of dwm as a compile time switch.
nice but as long as the stdin reader does not busy-wait it wouldn't save major cycles :P *SCNR*
