On Fri, Mar 31, 2006 at 11:55:38AM +0200, Stefan Tibus wrote: > On Fri, Mar 31, 2006 at 09:57:32AM +0200, Anselm R. Garbe wrote: > > I think you miss the point. If you select a view like '1+2' and > > in the meantime you want to switch to '3' then you have to > > explicitly to reselect '1+2' from the menu with entering '1+2' > > again, although it is still cached. For singular views you got > > shortcuts, they can be accessed very fast. That is why I create > > a label especially because of those joint views, to access them > > right faster through a mouse click, then entering the tag > > combination again and again to the menu, once you want to switch > > back to such a view. > > > > There is nothing wrong with displaying cached views (they are > > destroyed if no tag exists anymore, thus their lifetime is not > > longer than singular tags). > Well...I have on question here right now. Is 1+2 deleted as soon > as there is no client of either tag or only if there is no client > of both tags? In the latter case this may clutter your bar (which > is, as we know of limited space up to now) if you do something > like using views 1+2, 1+3, 1+4, 1+5 and deleting all clients of > 2,3,4,5 but not of tag 1 would still keep those union views in the > bar (I don't care about the cache size). If 1+2 is deleted as > soon as there is no client of 2, then I think it's ok. > Or in the case of 1+2+3 one may think of stripping this down to 1+3 > as soon as all tag 2 clients have gone.
This question is easy to answer: '+' corresponds to OR, thus a joint view survives until the last client disappeares which is related to any tag of the join. Though you'd normally not more than 1 joint view from time to time, thus I see no problem regarding bar space. Regards, -- Anselm R. Garbe ><>< www.ebrag.de ><>< GPG key: 0D73F361 _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://wmii.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/wmii
