Quoth Chad Perrin on Thursday, 23 September 2010: > On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 12:24:58PM -0500, Neal Hogan wrote: > > > > If you like xmonad, check out scrotwm. It's inspired by xmonad, > > lightweight, written in C by oBSD dev, actively maintained, and > > vim-like (among other things ;-). > > Why is "written in C" considered such a great benefit by the Scrotwm > developer(s)? Earlier today, I read this on the site: > > "On the other hand xmonad has great defaults, key bindings and > xinerama support but is crippled by not being written in C." > > What's up with that? How does Haskell "cripple" xmonad? > > -- > Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ]
I wondered the same thing myself. Haskell is compiled, and the result is very efficient. I also wondered why the mentions about being actively maintained -- it seems to me that xmonad gets updated pretty regularly. But I'm willing to give it a look. -- Sterling (Chip) Camden | [email protected] | 2048D/3A978E4F http://camdensoftware.com | http://chipstips.com | http://chipsquips.com
pgpYQR1NSyG5D.pgp
Description: PGP signature
