On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 03:20:09PM -0400, Dan Espen wrote: > Thomas Adam <[email protected]> writes: > I might take the blame for other mis-designed things, but > as far as I remember, that goes way back. I think the issue was those > pretty long commands "AddToFunc", etc. But the "+" sign is just broken. > On the other hand, I've never seen it cause a real problem. > I think Fvwm just scoops up commands so fast that it's unlikely that > there will be a conflict.
Probably because nobody uses dynamic menus much. When fvwm reads a file or PipeRead input, it does not do anything in between, but input from modules cound trigger that. Anyway, it would be nice to have a clean scripting engine that can handle this correctly. You'd just have to store a separate '+' context for each source from which fvwm reads commands. > It would be nice if Fvwm reported where it found an error > (line 40 .fvwm/config) which would make the parser aware > of where commands are coming from and provide a way to fix > this. Of course sometimes it would be "FvwmAnimate PID 1234, > 20th command". Good idea. We should write that down somewhere. Ciao Dominik ^_^ ^_^ -- Dominik Vogt
