On Wed, 17 Jan 2007, Viktor Griph wrote:
On Sun, 14 Jan 2007, Dominik Vogt wrote:
[snip]
It's not that I don't trust your code quality, but the stacking code is
very difficult to understand and very easy to break.
Yes, I've noticed this. And as you see I actually found a bug while writing
th
On Sun, 14 Jan 2007, Dominik Vogt wrote:
On Thu, Jan 11, 2007 at 03:59:58PM +0100, Viktor Griph wrote:
If an application itself tries to implement some kind of similar feature,
and does it in a simple (and bad) way it may result in a race condition
between fvwm and that app. I believe this is w
On Thu, Jan 11, 2007 at 03:59:58PM +0100, Viktor Griph wrote:
> If an application itself tries to implement some kind of similar feature,
> and does it in a simple (and bad) way it may result in a race condition
> between fvwm and that app. I believe this is what Apple Shake is doing
> based on
On Thu, Jan 11, 2007 at 03:59:58PM +0100, Viktor Griph wrote:
> If an application itself tries to implement some kind of similar feature,
> and does it in a simple (and bad) way it may result in a race condition
> between fvwm and that app. I believe this is what Apple Shake is doing
> based on
On Thu, 11 Jan 2007, Viktor Griph wrote:
...If this raise isn't to the topmost layer...
I mean is to the topmost layer
/Viktor
If an application itself tries to implement some kind of similar feature,
and does it in a simple (and bad) way it may result in a race condition
between fvwm and that app. I believe this is what Apple Shake is doing
based on some guesses, the face that IgnoreRestack solved it, and reading
the