> > It's really crap that with xrandr you have to address monitors by
> > name. Can't we restore all the old logic for the users of
> > FScreen.[ch] and just sort the xrandr monitors in a way that
> > matches the old numbering, i.e. 0 = global monitor and the rest in
> > a constant order that doesn't change when new monitors are added?
>
> Maybe. But the problem there is two-fold:
>
> 1. Mapping existing Xinerama screens with their ordering to the _same_
> screens which XRandR reports (which we don't know, unfortunately);
>
> 2. This assumes XRandR enumerates its screens in some deterministic
> order. Maybe it does, I haven't looked.
>
> I'm not sure what the problem is though---is there some significant
> overhead I'm overlooking?
As a user, this may be a naive question, but is it possible to offer
a position-based enumeration such that eg monitor 1 is the top left
one and the numbering increases to the right and down? My gut feeling
is that this will match many static multi-monitor configurations (it
certainly matches mine), although I suppose that it doesn't work well
if monitors overlap.
(As a user, I also have to say that I like treating all of my monitors
as one large screen that eg change to new virtual pages as a unit. I
hope that this stays an option.)
- cks
