i think scrollz already have this.
Anselm R. Garbe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Apr 01, 2008 at 03:24:44PM +0200, Matthias-Christian Ott wrote:
I want to start using ii for irc. What discouraged me from doing so
was
a proper input method. Currently I know 2 methods to effectively
pancake [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i think scrollz already have this.
But scrollz is an ununix irc client.
Regards
Matthias-Christian
pancake [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i think scrollz already have this.
But scrollz is an ununix irc client.
but scrollz is composed by two programs
- a terminal control with the described functionality
- an irc client that uses the terminal control tool
imho the terminal control is what you
Nibble [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi there,
And I can say that for xinerama we will probably need to adapt it to
support also vertical tiling. Using horitzontal it's mostly a waste of
space on big screens.
Yes, I think you are right. Furthermore, horizontal tiling (Anselm's
notation)
On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 2:59 PM, Anselm R. Garbe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What about getting rid of supporting the selection of multiple
tags at a time and celebrating the revival of the column layout
of wmii again in dwm 5.0? What about getting rid of all the tiled
layout flavors in favor
it would be hilariously great.
i've tried it, but never saw the point of this not-so-revolutionary concept.
On 4/2/08, Anselm R. Garbe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What about getting rid of supporting the selection of multiple
\o/
tags at a time and celebrating the revival of the column layout
of wmii again in dwm 5.0? What about getting rid of all the tiled
layout flavors in favor for the column
On Wed, Apr 02, 2008 at 03:23:39PM +0200, Sander van Dijk wrote:
On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 2:59 PM, Anselm R. Garbe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What about getting rid of supporting the selection of multiple
tags at a time and celebrating the revival of the column layout
of wmii again in dwm
Anselm R. Garbe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What about getting rid of supporting the selection of multiple
tags at a time and celebrating the revival of the column layout
of wmii again in dwm 5.0? What about getting rid of all the tiled
layout flavors in favor for the column layout?
I haven't
Anselm R. Garbe wrote:
What about getting rid of supporting the selection of multiple
tags at a time and celebrating the revival of the column layout
of wmii again in dwm 5.0? What about getting rid of all the tiled
layout flavors in favor for the column layout?
Could we please stop rewriting
I am still eager to sea a really acme-like *interface* additionally to
only it's layout. But i assume this is not your ambition.
On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 3:34 PM, Anselm R. Garbe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Apr 02, 2008 at 03:23:39PM +0200, Sander van Dijk wrote:
If you're serious though, what exactly do you mean? wmii-3/acme like
(as in: dynamic amount of columns, and three modes per column)?
Exactly.
Hm,
On Wed, Apr 02, 2008 at 03:53:10PM +0200, Sander van Dijk wrote:
On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 3:34 PM, Anselm R. Garbe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Apr 02, 2008 at 03:23:39PM +0200, Sander van Dijk wrote:
If you're serious though, what exactly do you mean? wmii-3/acme like
(as in: dynamic
On Wed, Apr 02, 2008 at 03:37:49PM +0200, Marc Andre Tanner wrote:
Anselm R. Garbe wrote:
What about getting rid of supporting the selection of multiple
tags at a time and celebrating the revival of the column layout
of wmii again in dwm 5.0? What about getting rid of all the tiled
layout
Hi,
Attached are two small patches to setmfact. The first one removes some
redundancy, saving 5 LOC; the second one reintroduces the MFACT define
that was present (as MWFACT) before, so that you can do setmfact(NULL)
to restore your initial master factor.
Taken together, they add 1 LOC.
Anselm R. Garbe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here is what I have exactly in mind from a user perspective:
Initially there is 1 column, a new client is inserted below the
currently selected window in the column, similiar to the stack
in tiled layout.
Each window can be moved left- or rightwards
On Wed, 2 Apr 2008, Anselm R. Garbe wrote:
What about getting rid of supporting the selection of multiple
tags at a time and celebrating the revival of the column layout
of wmii again in dwm 5.0? What about getting rid of all the tiled
layout flavors in favor for the column layout?
I would
On Wed, Apr 02, 2008 at 04:37:47PM +0200, Matthias Kirschner wrote:
* Anselm R. Garbe [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008-04-02 16:11:54 +0200]:
Initially there is 1 column, a new client is inserted below the
currently selected window in the column, similiar to the stack
in tiled layout.
If I open
Anselm R. Garbe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Apr 02, 2008 at 04:27:34PM +0200, Matthias-Christian Ott wrote:
Anselm R. Garbe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here is what I have exactly in mind from a user perspective:
Initially there is 1 column, a new client is inserted below the
Anselm R. Garbe wrote:
What about getting rid of supporting the selection of multiple
tags at a time
Please, don't do it, personaly, I use this feature very much.
Don't you think that eliminating it will approach dwm to workspace model?
On Wed, Apr 02, 2008 at 02:59:24PM +0200, Anselm R. Garbe wrote:
What about getting rid of supporting the selection of multiple
tags at a time and celebrating the revival of the column layout
of wmii again in dwm 5.0? What about getting rid of all the tiled
layout flavors in favor for the
Marc Andre Tanner dixit (2008-04-02, 15:37):
Anselm R. Garbe wrote:
What about getting rid of supporting the selection of multiple
tags at a time and celebrating the revival of the column layout
of wmii again in dwm 5.0? What about getting rid of all the tiled
layout flavors in favor for the
I never display multiple tags at a time. The idea, though very elegant,
doesn't work for me. I usually work by adding terminals, etc to a
single tag until there are too many to be useful then throw one or more
over to another tag and keep going.
For me a column layout would be appealing,
On Wed, Apr 02, 2008 at 07:43:06PM +0400, Michael wrote:
Anselm R. Garbe wrote:
What about getting rid of supporting the selection of multiple
tags at a time
Please, don't do it, personaly, I use this feature very much.
Don't you think that eliminating it will approach dwm to workspace
I really like this, though I seem to be in a minority.
Also looks like you need way more state to implement this.
I wonder, Anselm, if you looked at my optimal tile patch. It adds
more rows and columns as needed, is fairly simple, and doesn't require
more state.
On Wed, 2 Apr 2008, [EMAIL
On Wed, Apr 02, 2008 at 06:04:26PM +0200, Anselm R. Garbe wrote:
Well if it is not possible to view several tags at a time, two
tagall/dropall functions could be considered to apply/drop a certain
tag to all visible clients for convenience reasons.
But then after switching to another tag, I
On Wed, Apr 02, 2008 at 02:59:24PM +0200, Anselm R. Garbe wrote:
What about getting rid of supporting the selection of multiple
tags
I never used it, but it is more because most of the time I don't think about it,
and simply apply the same tag to two windows and switch to this one, instead of
On Wed, Apr 02, 2008 at 08:27:11PM +0400, Michael wrote:
On Wed, Apr 02, 2008 at 06:04:26PM +0200, Anselm R. Garbe wrote:
Well if it is not possible to view several tags at a time, two
tagall/dropall functions could be considered to apply/drop a certain
tag to all visible clients for
Hello,
below is a patch that shortens grabbuttons() a bit.
Cheers,
Johannes
PS: I really appreciate the attitude to reconsider everything from
time to time - even though I'm quite satisfied with current dwm.
diff --git a/dwm.c b/dwm.c
--- a/dwm.c
+++ b/dwm.c
@@ -805,36 +805,18 @@
void
On Wed, Apr 02, 2008 at 02:59:24PM +0200, Anselm R. Garbe wrote:
What about getting rid of supporting the selection of multiple tags
In my estimation, without multiple tagging, there's no reason to use dwm
--
# Kurt H Maier
I agree. For me, the major distinction between DWM and the other
window managers has been the use of tags instead of workspaces.
I also don't like the idea of moving windows around columns. I think
the zoom function is a sufficient mode of manipulating windows
(between master/slave areas). I feel
On Wed, Apr 02, 2008 at 07:01:11PM +0200, Johannes Hofmann wrote:
below is a patch that shortens grabbuttons() a bit.
Of course this will make it to hg tip ;)
Kind regards,
--
Anselm R. Garbe http://www.suckless.org/ GPG key: 0D73F361
On Wed, Apr 02, 2008 at 12:15:21PM -0400, John Grahor wrote:
I really like this, though I seem to be in a minority.
Also looks like you need way more state to implement this.
I wonder, Anselm, if you looked at my optimal tile patch. It adds
more rows and columns as needed, is fairly
On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 10:11 AM, Anselm R. Garbe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here is what I have exactly in mind from a user perspective:
... snip several command explanations ...
So the whole layout concept consists of basically 4 keys with 3
kinds of modifiers.
4x3 = 12 (TWELVE!) combos to
On Wednesday 02 of April 2008 19:47:30 voltaic wrote:
I agree. For me, the major distinction between DWM and the other
window managers has been the use of tags instead of workspaces.
I also don't like the idea of moving windows around columns. I think
the zoom function is a sufficient mode of
See subject, this is related to the column layout discussion ;)
--
Anselm R. Garbe http://www.suckless.org/ GPG key: 0D73F361
On Wed, Apr 02, 2008 at 11:42:57AM -0700, Michael Elkins wrote:
More refactoring:
- remove boilerplate code by creating a macro to generate layout
functions
- replace tileh/tilev with the version that do nmaster
It's interesting now that removing nmaster support doesn't really buy
that
On Wed, Apr 02, 2008 at 04:23:40PM +0200, Peter Hartlich wrote:
Attached are two small patches to setmfact. The first one removes some
redundancy, saving 5 LOC; the second one reintroduces the MFACT define
that was present (as MWFACT) before, so that you can do setmfact(NULL)
to restore your
Hi there,
I kindly ask you to give hg tip a try. If there are no bugs,
it will be dwm-4.9 tomorrow evening.
Kind regards,
--
Anselm R. Garbe http://www.suckless.org/ GPG key: 0D73F361
You could simplify the code by introducing to two global variables that
indicate whether the master or tiled area is horizontal.
So switching to |= would simply set tileh = True and leave masterh
unchanged and switchting to -|= would set tileh = True and masterh = True.
So you could simple
40 matches
Mail list logo
