On Fri, May 12, 2006 at 05:22:15PM +0200, Sander van Dijk wrote: > On 5/12/06, Denis Grelich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >On the other hand, why is a nil view needed at all? One could start in the > >view with the default tag, instead in a nil view. No need to apply a rule > >for the first windows then, and absolutely no need for a nil view. Clean > >and simple. (I'm so bold and claim that, although I didn't look into the > >source code ;) > > The problem is that the rules (and hence the 'default' view) are > written (and applied) in wmiirc, which is after wmiiwm is started. > Since it is possible that wmii is run after some other clients already > exist (when wmii is run from an xterm for instance), a fallback tag is > needed (since all clients need at least one tag, and there is no > default tag to give to clients that exist already before wmiirc is > run). In fact, one doesn't even _have_ to write any rules at all; in > that case, clients must still get a tag though...
Even if one would assume that /def/rules is not allowed to be empty, having no nil-tag won't suffice, because it is indecisable if a pattern will match or not, e.g. assume: /foo/ -> bar as only rule, it could be checked to be valid syntax and a valid rule, though having this without a hardcoded default tag would result in clients which get invisble for ever. That's why a default nil-tag is necessary. Regards, -- Anselm R. Garbe ><>< www.ebrag.de ><>< GPG key: 0D73F361 _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://wmii.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/wmii
