Re: [dwm] still simplicity or featureitis?
On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 01:48:49PM +0100, Szabolcs Nagy wrote: On 3/13/08, markus schnalke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: With the multihead thing comming up, I realize a lot of new ideas in different directions. Changes became big again and everything is a little bit experimental. Also complexity increased and the code base as well. i consider current tileh and tilev an improvement and more general solution than previous tile also window geom params now allows easy bottomstack, togglebar, etc setup. the floating mode flag in the layout is a bit ugly focus + restack is not optimal but i had the same feeling before monocle has some problems (if floating then every popup window is maximized, if not then it cannot be used as togglemax replacement for floating windows and has other side effects) but it's a useful layout imho current tip is not worse than earlier versions Personally, I've switched to wmii until dwm reaches a more usable state again... The changes are just too much for me to get used to and I feel like it has gone in a backwards direction... -- Jeremy O'Brien aka neutral_insomniac GPG key: 0xB1140FDB http://pohl.ececs.uc.edu/~jeremy/jeremy.asc Linux lucifer 2.6.24-ARCH #1 SMP PREEMPT i686 Intel(R) Pentium(R) M processor 1400MHz pgp02ikHUjaVv.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [dwm] still simplicity or featureitis?
On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 01:07:01PM +0100, markus schnalke wrote: I remember a time (probably between version 4.1 or 4.4 or so), when the development of dwm became more and more stable. dwm began to reach a point near finished (or perfect). Changes became smaller, and mostly it was optimizing the existent features and simplyfing. With the multihead thing comming up, I realize a lot of new ideas in different directions. Changes became big again and everything is a little bit experimental. Also complexity increased and the code base as well. I don't think your observation is true. ; wc -l dwm-4.7/dwm.c 1914 dwm.c ; wc -l dwm-4.7/config.def.h 93 config.def.h ; wc -l dwm-4.7/dwm.1 156 dwm.1 Binary size of dwm-4.7: -rwxr-xr-x 1 anselm anselm 28048 2008-03-13 16:40 dwm ; wc -l dwm-4.8/dwm.c 1911 dwm.c ; wc -l dwm-4.8/config.def.h 93 config.def.h ; wc -l dwm-4.8/dwm.1 157 dwm.1 Binary size of dwm-4.8: -rwxr-xr-x 1 anselm anselm 28048 2008-03-13 16:38 dwm So dwm-4.8 is not bigger or more complex than 4.7. The differences in both are -- dwm-4.8 allows for a more flexible setup regarding master area, bar position, and tile area. dwm-4.8 also allows for easier integration with new layouts and it comes packed already with 4 different layouts. It does not contain setmwfact(), and togglebar(), because these should be changed in a user-defined function, similiar to config.anselm.h. It also does not include togglemax() anymore in favor for monocle. There have been also a lot of code cleanups and polishing, so imho the stability should be similiar as in dwm-4.7 again. I think special stuff that only few people use should not be included in core (or mainstream) dwm. These functionality should be provided as patches instead. Well, if you'd consider the current code base more carefully, you would have noticed that dwm-4.8 is exactly about this. Compare config.def.h to config.anselm.h to see how your remark is realized. (Patching core dwm should be seen as central characteristic of dwm usage, in my eyes.) Exactly. I would like to see dwm coming back to this nearly finished state again, because it was nearly finished ... and now it's again in this featureitis trap. I don't think you are right in this regard. There were some experiments during the last months, but most of them disappeared already again. Kind regards, -- Anselm R. Garbe http://www.suckless.org/ GPG key: 0D73F361
Re: [dwm] still simplicity or featureitis?
On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 01:48:49PM +0100, Szabolcs Nagy wrote: On 3/13/08, markus schnalke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: With the multihead thing comming up, I realize a lot of new ideas in different directions. Changes became big again and everything is a little bit experimental. Also complexity increased and the code base as well. i consider current tileh and tilev an improvement and more general solution than previous tile Me as well. the floating mode flag in the layout is a bit ugly Well, if you have a better proposal for 4.9, let me know. focus + restack is not optimal but i had the same feeling before What's the issue here? monocle has some problems (if floating then every popup window is maximized, if not then it cannot be used as togglemax replacement for floating windows and has other side effects) but it's a useful layout Well, that's why monocle should be used as a floating layout. imho current tip is not worse than earlier versions Agreed, and that's why I'm going to release dwm-4.8 now. Kind regards, -- Anselm R. Garbe http://www.suckless.org/ GPG key: 0D73F361
[dwm] dwm-4.8 / dmenu-3.5 / slock-0.8
Hi there, I'm glad to announce some new releases after months of development and absence: http://www.suckless.org/download/dwm-4.8.tar.gz http://www.suckless.org/download/dmenu-3.5.tar.gz http://www.suckless.org/download/slock-0.8.tar.gz Regarding dwm I recommend you to use diff(1) to look carefully for differences between dwm-4.8/config.def.h and dwm-4.7/config.def.h Kind regards, -- Anselm R. Garbe http://www.suckless.org/ GPG key: 0D73F361
Re: [dwm] still simplicity or featureitis?
On Thu, 13 Mar 2008 17:49:10 +0100 Anselm R. Garbe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 11:52:20AM -0400, Jeremy O'Brien wrote: On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 01:48:49PM +0100, Szabolcs Nagy wrote: On 3/13/08, markus schnalke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Personally, I've switched to wmii until dwm reaches a more usable state again... The changes are just too much for me to get used to and I feel like it has gone in a backwards direction... Well, this is not true for at least 2 weeks imho. Hey! Don't be tragic ;) The change between 4.7 and 4.8 is going to be more drastic than expected originally, but don't panic, you can still using 4.7. The development direction is imho going in a more flexible way and this will make dwm more flexible and extensible. The current config.h complexity can be easily reduced for single user monitors and the current idea permits to extend without increasing complexity extremely. We will probably need to rewrite the layouts and other stuff to match this new paradigm which I don't see definitive, because of the limitation of the master area that makes nmaster like layouts more hard to port. BTW I see some benefits on this new paradigm, but I cant test xinerama atm, and I understand the comminity wants a new release. But it's probably unnecessary. THe current dwm in hg has some pixel width problems, so I think it needs more work. What's your proposal to solve the xinerama problem? --pancake
[dwm] my dual-monitor layout
Hi all,
I use laptop with secondary monitor right-hand of it by xrandr.
Long term icewm user, tried awesome and xmonad. Now I use dwm exclusively.
I work on laptop keyboard so the laptop monitor always is my main window,
MWFACT set to the ratio of monitors width.
Thank to yiyus hint I changed line in function tile introducing Bool
mainonly. In dwm-4.3 version it is:
mw = ((n nmaster) || mainonly ) ? (waw * masterw) / 1000 : waw;
and new function:
void
togglemainonly(const char *arg) {
mainonly = !mainonly;
lt-arrange();
}
Results of function togglemax actions were confusing for me so it is not
used at all and its keybinding MOD+m is associated with togglemainonly.
With such extensions and xrandr commands I can switch dual/single monitor
layout on the fly - it IS laptop anyway.
Cycling through tags is quite useful, so added it as well.
Worked great in dwm-4.7, however sometimes I missed possibility to
increase number of clients in the master area. Unfortunately my knowledge
of C is less than basic and I cannot implement NMASTER feature in dwm-4.7.
Hence I switched back to dwm-4.3 and applied (changed accordingly) my
patches to it.
For me it is the best dual head configuration so far.
I hope it helps
kind regards
Jacek Hoffman
Re: [dwm] recent changes
multiscreen setups (hopefully) will remain a rather small niche, I'd say: large desktop monitors are already available at affordable prices One of the reasons multiple monitors are more popular than big monitors is that, if you've got a graphics card that supports multiple outputs anyway, the cost of adding a second mass-market size monitor is significantly less than buying a large monitor replacement. Likewise it's easier to scrounge a second unused monitor at work than manage to get a big monitor purchase authorised. So whilst retaining excellent single monitor support is important, I don't think multihead setups should be downplayed. (I'm waiting for the dwm codebase to settle down before looking at porting my patches forward. Ironically it's not the new features that are making me wait but the moving code around and back again seeing what's aesthetically nicer or gives a smaller wc value that has me waiting.) -- cheers, dave tweed__ [EMAIL PROTECTED] Rm 124, School of Systems Engineering, University of Reading. while having code so boring anyone can maintain it, use Python. -- attempted insult seen on slashdot
Re: [dwm] dwm-4.8 / dmenu-3.5 / slock-0.8
On Thu, 13 Mar 2008 18:08:03 +0100 Anselm R. Garbe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi there, I'm glad to announce some new releases after months of development and absence: http://www.suckless.org/download/dwm-4.8.tar.gz http://www.suckless.org/download/dmenu-3.5.tar.gz http://www.suckless.org/download/slock-0.8.tar.gz updated togglebar and mwfact patches for 4.8. http://news.nopcode.org/mwfact.c http://news.nopcode.org/togglebar.c --pancake
Re: [dwm] recent changes
Two 1600x1200 monitors will give you 3200x1200 for less than 400 euros. It's not only cheap, but I haven't seen any monitor with that much pixels at all. Of course Laptops are becoming more and more common these days, and a lot of people add bigger monitors to it. I think It's ok if you say dwm is not made for xinerama. But it used to be on the todo list... -- hiro
Re: [dwm] I miss regex and what is the right way to apply geometry at startup.
On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 07:39:02PM -0400, John A. Grahor wrote:
I know Anselm asked if anybody cared whether regex was deleted and I
didn't reply so I guess is should hold my peace now;) But my problem
isn't really with the lack of regex but with the fact that where before
the rules processing would work with a string of the form
class:instance:title, now it works with each of class, instance and
title independently, searching each one for the rule string.
That's a valid remark. But instead of constructing the string
again, I consider changing Rule as follows:
typdef struct {
const char *class;
const char *instance;
const char *title;
const char *tag;
Bool isfloating;
} Rule;
This allows for faster matching. Expect it happen in a rather
soon 4.9 release.
On a separate subject, is there a way to apply non-default geometry
settings at start up without editing dwm.c and changing setdefaultgeoms.
What I want to do is reset setgeoms in config.h but I don't know how
to make that happen. Or can setdefaultgeoms be redefined in config.h?
I don't think so.
The setgeoms definition will be moved to config.h as proposed
some minutes before I did the release ;)
Kind regards,
--
Anselm R. Garbe http://www.suckless.org/ GPG key: 0D73F361
Re: [dwm] dwm-4.8 / dmenu-3.5 / slock-0.8
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 20:30:18 +0100 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: dwm@suckless.org Subject: Re: [dwm] dwm-4.8 / dmenu-3.5 / slock-0.8 On Thu, 13 Mar 2008 18:08:03 +0100 Anselm R. Garbe wrote: Hi there, I'm glad to announce some new releases after months of development and absence: http://www.suckless.org/download/dwm-4.8.tar.gz http://www.suckless.org/download/dmenu-3.5.tar.gz http://www.suckless.org/download/slock-0.8.tar.gz updated togglebar and mwfact patches for 4.8. http://news.nopcode.org/mwfact.c http://news.nopcode.org/togglebar.c --pancake pancake- Togglebar and mwfact are essential, and they are working great. Thanks. Also, I like your color scheme too; I might keep it. _ Don't get caught with egg on your face. Play chicktionary! http://club.live.com/chicktionary.aspx?icid=chick_wlhmtextlink1_feb
Re: [dwm] dwm-4.8 / dmenu-3.5 / slock-0.8
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 18:08:03 +0100 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: dwm@suckless.org Subject: [dwm] dwm-4.8 / dmenu-3.5 / slock-0.8 Hi there, I'm glad to announce some new releases after months of development and absence: http://www.suckless.org/download/dwm-4.8.tar.gz http://www.suckless.org/download/dmenu-3.5.tar.gz http://www.suckless.org/download/slock-0.8.tar.gz Regarding dwm I recommend you to use diff(1) to look carefully for differences between dwm-4.8/config.def.h and dwm-4.7/config.def.h Kind regards, -- Anselm R. Garbe http://www.suckless.org/ GPG key: 0D73F361 MONOCLE! MONOCLE! MONOCLE! This is working perfectly. It is a huge improvement I've been waiting for. Good work! Also, it definitely fixes what (I thought) was some confusing behavior by firefox. Monocle is *essential* in my opinion. Now I hope someone updates bottomstack for 4.8. Ideally, I want to cycle: vertical/horizontal/monocle. _ Watch “Cause Effect,” a show about real people making a real difference. Learn more. http://im.live.com/Messenger/IM/MTV/?source=text_watchcause
Re: [dwm] dwm-4.8 / dmenu-3.5 / slock-0.8
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: dwm@suckless.org Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 22:43:24 -0400 Subject: Re: [dwm] dwm-4.8 / dmenu-3.5 / slock-0.8 Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 20:30:18 +0100 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: dwm@suckless.org Subject: Re: [dwm] dwm-4.8 / dmenu-3.5 / slock-0.8 On Thu, 13 Mar 2008 18:08:03 +0100 Anselm R. Garbe wrote: Hi there, I'm glad to announce some new releases after months of development and absence: http://www.suckless.org/download/dwm-4.8.tar.gz http://www.suckless.org/download/dmenu-3.5.tar.gz http://www.suckless.org/download/slock-0.8.tar.gz updated togglebar and mwfact patches for 4.8. http://news.nopcode.org/mwfact.c http://news.nopcode.org/togglebar.c --pancake pancake- Togglebar and mwfact are essential, and they are working great. Thanks. Also, I like your color scheme too; I might keep it. When there is only one window, and togglebar removes the bar, a gap remains. If the window is floating, it doesn't move, and a gap is left where the bar was removed. If it isn't floating, the window moves up, creating a gap at the bottom. (The window is not resizing following the removal of the bar.) With two or more windows open, they resize, leaving no gap. _ Enter the Zune-A-Day Giveaway for your chance to win — day after day after day http://www.windowslive-hotmail.com/ZuneADay/?locale=en-USocid=TXT_TAGLM_Mobile_Zune_V1
