Yoshi Rokuko wrote:
I agree, but what about simplicity if you need to program and to run an
extra binary in order to get the status of your windows? I think you would
get more flexibility but lose simplicity?
You are wise, there is a tradeoff. DWM is, I think, the community
for those who balanc
> On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 6:28 PM, Christian Garbs wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 01:42:32PM +0100, hiro wrote:
>> dwm arranges the windows on the screen, nothing more, nothing less.
>> No program icons, no desktop environment, no notification services.
>
> Dwm is arranging windows dynamically,
hiro wrote:
Dwm is also philosophically transformational if you've not previously
absorbed the concept of "Simplicity as a Virtue".
I don't understand a word, sorry.
And yeah, I understand what simplicity is about..
I didn't mean to imply that you hadn't. I mean there is a world
of open s
> Dwm is also philosophically transformational if you've not previously
> absorbed the concept of "Simplicity as a Virtue".
I don't understand a word, sorry.
And yeah, I understand what simplicity is about...
hiro wrote:
Dwm is arranging windows dynamically, listens to multiple X events
and, as far as I know, provides a status bar.
It's doing quite some stuff in my view...
Dwm is also philosophically transformational if you've not previously
absorbed the concept of "Simplicity as a Virtue".
--
Ja
On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 6:28 PM, Christian Garbs wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 01:42:32PM +0100, hiro wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 11:22 AM, Yoshi Rokuko
>> wrote:
>> > On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 10:37:58AM +0100, hiro wrote:
>
>> >> Still, dwm somehow seems very much not unix alike for me.
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 01:42:32PM +0100, hiro wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 11:22 AM, Yoshi Rokuko
> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 10:37:58AM +0100, hiro wrote:
> >> Still, dwm somehow seems very much not unix alike for me.
> > what do you mean, or what would be a more nix'isch WM?
>
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 2:33 PM, markus schnalke wrote:
> [2009-01-20 13:42] hiro <23h...@googlemail.com>
>> On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 11:22 AM, Yoshi Rokuko
>> wrote:
>> > On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 10:37:58AM +0100, hiro wrote:
>> >> Still, dwm somehow seems very much not unix alike for me.
>> >
>>
[2009-01-20 13:42] hiro <23h...@googlemail.com>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 11:22 AM, Yoshi Rokuko
> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 10:37:58AM +0100, hiro wrote:
> >> Still, dwm somehow seems very much not unix alike for me.
> >
> > what do you mean, or what would be a more nix'isch WM?
>
> Co
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 11:22 AM, Yoshi Rokuko wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 10:37:58AM +0100, hiro wrote:
>> Still, dwm somehow seems very much not unix alike for me.
>
> what do you mean, or what would be a more nix'isch WM?
>
> regards, y0shi
>
>
Could be, that X doesn't allow it to be more
2009/1/20 hiro <23h...@googlemail.com>:
[snip]
> Still, dwm somehow seems very much not unix alike for me.
>
Well, X doesn't look like UNIX neither, however you look at it.
--
- yiyus || JGL .
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 10:37:58AM +0100, hiro wrote:
> Still, dwm somehow seems very much not unix alike for me.
what do you mean, or what would be a more nix'isch WM?
regards, y0shi
I think andrew's point is about dwm's very own style.
You can, though, use dwm without any problems out of the box, and thus
I don't fully agree with him.
Still, dwm somehow seems very much not unix alike for me.
On (20/01/09 09:49), henry atting wrote:
> To: dwm@suckless.org
> From: henry atting
> Subject: [dwm] Re: What happened here?
> Reply-To: dwm mail list
> List-Id: dwm mail list
> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux)
> Cancel-Lock: sha1:WaXw8q
I recently switched from dwm to xmonad.
I did not like the rigid constraint on a certain number of code lines.
The resulting way of doing it with patches in my opinion is not
very sincere. I needed only two - and they did not match.
Though I do not know haskell at all I find it very simple to con
15 matches
Mail list logo
