Re: [ctwm] Modifying the modifiers for bindings...
On Wed, Jun 06, 2007 at 03:42:32PM +0200 I heard the voice of Richard Levitte, and lo! it spake thus: Well, with my new syntax suggestion, it's still possible to retain the old syntax for a while, possibly with BIG LETTER WARNINGS that the old syntax is going to disappear with version 4.0. I tend to like BIG LETTER WARNINGS, especially when something is going to continue being valid, but start meaning something different. Especially when it's something relatively subtlely different that will be hard to figure out if you don't already know the answer. -- Matthew Fuller (MF4839) | [EMAIL PROTECTED] Systems/Network Administrator | http://www.over-yonder.net/~fullermd/ On the Internet, nobody can hear you scream.
Re: [ctwm] Modifying the modifiers for bindings...
On Tue, 5 Jun 2007, Richard Levitte wrote:
Hi guys,
Just having a boring morning here, so thought of join in a little bit
here.
Nadav Har'El writes:
In other words, it appears that there never really was a need for the
inconsistent vertical bar in the modifier list, and a space can be used.
Ayup, I just looked in gram.y and found that the | is simply ignored (see the
key rule and you'll see a line saying just | OR {}). I never noticed
this before...
One thing I wonder about is how important is it to be so backward
compatible that we do support some 22 year old syntax for a window manager
that I don't know if we do share any code with?
Maybe it could be time to make things more easy to see and use?
I'm not thinking of going xml (gosh I hate xml config files), but as you,
Richard, suggested.
--
//Aho
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]URL: http://www.kotiaho.net/~trizt/
ICQ: 13696780
System: Linux System (PPC7447/1000 AMD K7A/2000)
EU forbids you to send spam without my permission
Re: [ctwm] Modifying the modifiers for bindings...
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Wed, 6 Jun 2007 11:44:41 +0200 (CEST), J.O. Aho [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: trizt One thing I wonder about is how important is it to be so trizt backward compatible that we do support some 22 year old syntax trizt for a window manager that I don't know if we do share any code trizt with? trizt trizt Maybe it could be time to make things more easy to see and use? trizt I'm not thinking of going xml (gosh I hate xml config files), trizt but as you, Richard, suggested. Well, with my new syntax suggestion, it's still possible to retain the old syntax for a while, possibly with BIG LETTER WARNINGS that the old syntax is going to disappear with version 4.0. The alternative is, of course, to just remake the syntax as we see fit, release 4.0, and then watch the flood of people whose ctwm suddenly doesn't work as expected. Aho, I hereby appoint you as primary contact for that kind of complaint ;-) Cheers, Richard -- Richard Levitte [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://richard.levitte.org/ When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up. -- C.S. Lewis
Re: [ctwm] Modifying the modifiers for bindings...
On Wed, Jun 06, 2007, Richard Levitte wrote about Re: [ctwm] Modifying the modifiers for bindings...: Well, with my new syntax suggestion, it's still possible to retain the old syntax for a while, possibly with BIG LETTER WARNINGS that the old syntax is going to disappear with version 4.0. Yes. Though as I mentioned you don't really have to (you can, but don't have to) invent the new + syntax, if you think the syntax (which also works and always did) looks good enough. If you think it is good enough, the manual page can recommend using space (not the vertical bar) for the and of several modifiers, and it will no longer look inconsistent (on what a vertical bar means) as it does now. The new , syntax isn't strictly necessary, because as you said it is just a shortcut for several identical lines. Do you expect this to be a useful shortcut? Why would anyone want to bind Either control-A or alt-shift-A to a certain action? Or am I missing an important use case? -- Nadav Har'El|Wednesday, Jun 6 2007, 21 Sivan 5767 [EMAIL PROTECTED] |- Phone +972-523-790466, ICQ 13349191 |Computers are useless. They can only http://nadav.harel.org.il |give you answers. -- Pablo Picasso
Re: [ctwm] Modifying the modifiers for bindings...
Nadav Har'El on wrote... | On Wed, Jun 06, 2007, Richard Levitte wrote about Re: [ctwm] Modifying the modifiers for bindings...: | Well, with my new syntax suggestion, it's still possible to retain the | old syntax for a while, possibly with BIG LETTER WARNINGS that the old | syntax is going to disappear with version 4.0. | | Yes. Though as I mentioned you don't really have to (you can, but don't have | to) invent the new + syntax, if you think the syntax (which also works | and always did) looks good enough. If you think it is good enough, the manual | page can recommend using space (not the vertical bar) for the and of | several modifiers, and it will no longer look inconsistent (on what a vertical | bar means) as it does now. | | The new , syntax isn't strictly necessary, because as you said it is just a | shortcut for several identical lines. Do you expect this to be a useful | shortcut? Why would anyone want to bind Either control-A or alt-shift-A | to a certain action? Or am I missing an important use case? | While the ' ' can be used as a separator, what about no space at all. All the modifiers are single letters, so can't ctwm parse this Pause = sc : r|w|t|m|f : f.twmrc As meaning all Shift-Ctrl-Pause Pause = s|m|c : r|w|t|m|f : f.twmrc or Pause = s c : r|w|t|m|f : f.twmrc Anthony Thyssen ( System Programmer )[EMAIL PROTECTED] - Lottery(n) :- A tax on people who are bad at maths. - Anthony's Home is his Castle http://www.cit.gu.edu.au/~anthony/
Re: [ctwm] Modifying the modifiers for bindings...
On Thu, Jun 07, 2007 at 09:10:02AM +1000 I heard the voice of Anthony Thyssen, and lo! it spake thus: All the modifiers are single letters, They're not, actually; I use control and meta in my rc file (and 'title' and 'window' and such for the location too, come to that). -- Matthew Fuller (MF4839) | [EMAIL PROTECTED] Systems/Network Administrator | http://www.over-yonder.net/~fullermd/ On the Internet, nobody can hear you scream.
Re: [ctwm] Modifying the modifiers for bindings...
Matthew D. Fuller on wrote... | On Thu, Jun 07, 2007 at 09:10:02AM +1000 I heard the voice of | Anthony Thyssen, and lo! it spake thus: | | All the modifiers are single letters, | | They're not, actually; I use control and meta in my rc file (and | 'title' and 'window' and such for the location too, come to that). | Oh. Sorry. Anthony Thyssen ( System Programmer )[EMAIL PROTECTED] - Philosophy (n): unintelligible answers to insoluble problems. - Anthony's Home is his Castle http://www.cit.gu.edu.au/~anthony/
Re: [ctwm] Modifying the modifiers for bindings...
On Wed, 6 Jun 2007, Richard Levitte wrote: Well, with my new syntax suggestion, it's still possible to retain the old syntax for a while, possibly with BIG LETTER WARNINGS that the old syntax is going to disappear with version 4.0. The alternative is, of course, to just remake the syntax as we see fit, release 4.0, and then watch the flood of people whose ctwm suddenly doesn't work as expected. Aho, I hereby appoint you as primary contact for that kind of complaint ;-) No problems, I can redirect everything to /dev/null ;) Yes, of course it can be a good idea to notify the dropping of some syntaxes, man pages has to be updated and the ideal would be to get as many websites that emntions | to be updates, but I guess that can be problematic as you need to locate all of them and then try to get in contact of the author/owner, who may have changed e-mail address 20 times after they last updated the page. Google says they have 89,700 results when searching for ctwm. -- //Aho E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]URL: http://www.kotiaho.net/~trizt/ ICQ: 13696780 System: Linux System (PPC7447/1000 AMD K7A/2000) EU forbids you to send spam without my permission
[ctwm] Modifying the modifiers for bindings...
Hello, it's just come to my attention that we have a synctactic inconsistency in the bindings: F1 = c|m : icon|frame : f.dofoo The inconsistency is that for the modifiers, | symbolises addition (AND operation) while for the context field, it symbolises alternatives (OR operation). Furthermore, I just had a request from a friend that | could really mean OR and could mean AND, and that would make it possible to specify several modifier combinations in one go. I'm not entirely happy with that choice of operators for backward compatibility reasons, but I could go with something like this (using , and + instead): F1 = c+m,s : icon|frame : f.dofoo That would mean the same thing as the following currently would: F1 = c|m : icon|frame : f.dofoo F1 = s : icon|frame : f.dofoo What say you? Good idea? Bad idea? At the very least, I'd like to go away from the inconsistent interpretation of |. Cheers, Richard P.S. My laptop is without network, so I'm using a web interface to my mailbox. This message will probably not look the way mine usually do ;-)
Re: [ctwm] Modifying the modifiers for bindings...
On Tue, Jun 05, 2007, Richard Levitte wrote about [ctwm] Modifying the modifiers for bindings...: ... F1 = c|m : icon|frame : f.dofoo modifier combinations in one go. I'm not entirely happy with that choice of operators for backward compatibility reasons, but I could go with something like this (using , and + instead): ... I wonder when this | for modifiers came into use... I've been using twm derivatives for more than 15 years (and ctwm itself for more than a decade), so my configuration file is a living fossil ;-) It always looked, and still looks, like this: A = c m : all : f.autoraise Button2 = : icon | title : f.move In other words, it appears that there never really was a need for the inconsistent vertical bar in the modifier list, and a space can be used. I don't know why it was explained with the bar in the documentation, or why ctwm accepts the vertical bar there at all. I see that the X11R6 twm documentation also talks about this vertical bar - but I guess that once upon a time, it didn't (otherwise, I don't know how I ever decided to write c m, with a space). -- Nadav Har'El| Tuesday, Jun 5 2007, 19 Sivan 5767 [EMAIL PROTECTED] |- Phone +972-523-790466, ICQ 13349191 |The fact that no one understands you http://nadav.harel.org.il |doesn't mean you're an artist.
Re: [ctwm] Modifying the modifiers for bindings...
Nadav Har'El writes:
In other words, it appears that there never really was a need for the
inconsistent vertical bar in the modifier list, and a space can be used.
Ayup, I just looked in gram.y and found that the | is simply ignored (see
the key rule and you'll see a line saying just | OR {}). I never
noticed this before...
Cheers,
Richard
