Re: [hackers] [[dwm][PATCH]] drw / utf8decode : simpler is better ?

2022-08-15 Thread NRK
On Tue, Aug 16, 2022 at 12:00:52AM +0200, Hiltjo Posthuma wrote: > I'd like to keep these functions. drw.{c,h} and some util functions are shared > between some projects. All the utf8 functions in drw.c are `static`. They can't be used from another TU, by default at least. If they *are* being

Re: [hackers] [[dwm][PATCH]] drw / utf8decode : simpler is better ?

2022-08-15 Thread Hiltjo Posthuma
On Tue, Jul 19, 2022 at 04:38:34PM +0200, nenesses wrote: > --- > drw.c | 15 +++ > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drw.c b/drw.c > index ced7d37..b6073a4 100644 > --- a/drw.c > +++ b/drw.c > @@ -25,16 +25,6 @@ utf8decodebyte(const char c, size_t *i)

[hackers] Re: [[dwm][PATCH]] drw / utf8decode : simpler is better ?

2022-08-15 Thread la . luge
Since 8 november 2015 in dwm-6.1 and dmenu-4.6 without modifications. - Mail original - De: "nenesses" À: "hackers" Cc: "nenesses" Envoyé: Mardi 19 Juillet 2022 16:38:34 Objet: [[dwm][PATCH]] drw / utf8decode : simpler is better ? --- drw.c | 15 +++ 1 file changed, 3

Re: [hackers] [[dwm][PATCH]] drw / utf8decode : simpler is better ?

2022-08-15 Thread NRK
On Tue, Jul 19, 2022 at 04:38:34PM +0200, nenesses wrote: > -static size_t > -utf8validate(long *u, size_t i) > -{ > - if (!BETWEEN(*u, utfmin[i], utfmax[i]) || BETWEEN(*u, 0xD800, 0xDFFF)) > - *u = UTF_INVALID; > - for (i = 1; *u > utfmax[i]; ++i) > - ; > -

[hackers] [dwm][PATCH] Remove blw variable in favour of calculating the value when needed

2022-08-15 Thread Stein
The purpose and reasoning behind the bar layout width (blw) variable in dwm the way it is today may not be immediately obvious. The use of the variable makes more sense when looking at commit 2ce37bc from 2009 where blw was initialised in the setup function and it represented the maximum of all