On Sun, 24 Nov 2013 10:20:46 +0000
"Carlos R. Mafra" <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Sat, 23 Nov 2013 at 22:22:18 +0100, Amadeusz Sławiński wrote:
> > Reported-by: Carlos R. Mafra <[email protected]>
> > Signed-off-by: Amadeusz Sławiński <[email protected]>
> > ---
> >  src/placement.c | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 21 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/src/placement.c b/src/placement.c
> > index f48ee3c..7587b87 100644
> > --- a/src/placement.c
> > +++ b/src/placement.c
> > @@ -507,6 +507,27 @@ void PlaceWindow(WWindow *wwin, int *x_ret,
> > int *y_ret, unsigned width, unsigned WArea usableArea =
> > wGetUsableAreaForHead(scr, wGetHeadForPointerLocation(scr), NULL,
> > True); 
> > +   /* check if user wants dock covered */
> > +   if (scr->dock && (!scr->dock->lowered ||
> > wPreferences.no_window_over_dock)) {
> > +           int offset = wPreferences.icon_size +
> > DOCK_EXTRA_SPACE; +
> > +           if (scr->dock->on_right_side)
> > +                   usableArea.x2 -= offset;
> > +           else
> > +                   usableArea.x1 += offset;
> > +   }
> > +
> > +   /* check if icons are on the same side as dock, and adjust
> > if not done already */
> > +   if (scr->dock && wPreferences.no_window_over_icons
> > && !wPreferences.no_window_over_dock && (wPreferences.icon_yard &
> > IY_VERT)) {
> > +           int offset = wPreferences.icon_size +
> > DOCK_EXTRA_SPACE; +
> > +           if (scr->dock->on_right_side &&
> > (wPreferences.icon_yard & IY_RIGHT))
> > +                   usableArea.x2 -= offset;
> > +           /* can't use IY_LEFT in if, it's 0 ... */
> > +           if (!scr->dock->on_right_side
> > && !(wPreferences.icon_yard & IY_RIGHT))
> > +                   usableArea.x1 += offset;
> > +   }
> > +
> >     switch (wPreferences.window_placement) {
> >     case WPM_MANUAL:
> >             InteractivePlaceWindow(wwin, x_ret, y_ret, width,
> > height); -- 
> 
> This patch fixes it, thanks.
> 
> But could you explain the reason? In your series you added these
> blocks of code in other parts too, and I'd like to understand
> why this multiplication is justified.
> 
> In any case, thanks a lot!
> 
> 

Thanks for confirming that it works, I've taken another look and send
a patch which explains it, and moves code into shared function.


--
To unsubscribe, send mail to [email protected].

Reply via email to