On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 05:03:47PM -0400, Stephen Dennison wrote: > > > > You can find the draft at: > > https://github.com/fvwmorg/fvwm/blob/ta/new-config-format/ > > docs/NEW-CONFIG.md > > > > > I read through the draft a bit, below are my questions/comments. > > For parsing compatibility, perhaps a special command, comment, or token to > indicate which format is being used so that FVWM (and humans) need not > guess?
Doubtful. We don't do that for FVWM right now, and indeed, any changes would presumably happen through conversion scripts as they do now. Not to mention, as the configuration file is line-based, any "version" token would have to be embedded on every line. > Will there be a way to have fvwm yield it's current configuration while > it's running? If you're going through the effort of redoing the > configuration parser, this seems like a great time to do this and it would > be a huge motivator for using the new syntax. Yup. > I'm trying to make sense of the use of comma in the -w option. It's not > very mini-CLI of it. Why not allow the -w option to be specified more than Well, separating out -w wouldn't make the effect cumulative, which is what I'm trying to demonstrate. Note also that the CLI-like syntac is just that---in the style of, and there's many instances of commands in the wild which have similar comma-separate examples (sort(1)). > Do you plan support actual string names of colorsets or are you just sort > of shoehorning the -n name for the number? It's all the same to mE > The values passed to -t in those focus commands has me confused. Above, > something else that had -t used the format screen:desk.page but this > doesn't appear to apply to the Focus command. Could you more explicitly > describe this? I'll update the document. Thanks! -- Thomas Adam
