On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 16:16:28 +0300
Dimitar Zhekov <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 12:51:21 +0100
> Nick Treleaven <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, 12 Aug 2010 13:30:25 +1000
> > Erik de Castro Lopo <[email protected]> wrote:
> > 
> > > > Thanks for your work on this. From a very brief look the design looks
> > > > good but I haven't tested it.
> > > 
> > > As I think Dimitar mentioned, windows has named rather than numbered
> > > workspaces. It would be relatively trivial to rework my patch so that
> > > the function that finds the workspace number instead generates a 
> > > string for the workspace number.
> > > 
> > > Let me know if you want this and I'll rejig and resubmit the 
> > > patch.
> > 
> > I suppose so. I've never heard of multiple workspaces on Windows other
> > than by non-standard utilities so any links would be appreciated.
> 
> Any NT-system supports "virtual desktops". Win 9x does not.
> 
> google site:msdn.microsoft.com Window Station and Desktop Functions,
> http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/cc817881.aspx
> 
> For example, the login screen is on separate desktop, with a higher
> level of propection that the regular ones; XP "fast user switching"
> creates per-user window stations, and desktops within them.
> 
> Almost no applications support these. For example, if you run FF on two
> desktops, the 2nd instance will say "FF is already running" and exit.
> Windows itself does not handle them very well: Task Manager and the
> Ctrl-Alt-Del window are always displayed on the initial desktop, but
> the system does not switch to it, and it looks like nothing happened.

OK, thanks. It seems it's not that important to support Windows
workspaces.

Regards,
Nick
_______________________________________________
Geany-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.uvena.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geany-devel

Reply via email to