Re: [dev] dwm default bindings

On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 11:13 AM, Donald Allen<donaldcallen_AT_gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 10:42 AM, Julien Pecqueur
> (JPEC)<jpec_AT_julienpecqueur.com> wrote:
>> I think the ctrl+alt combinaison suck : you need two hands for killing a client...
>
> Not so, at least on my IBM keyboards and Thinkpad laptop keyboards.
> Left pinky and thumb on ctrl and alt, 2nd (pointer) finger on c.

Oops -- forgot 4th finger on shift. This is not difficult for me, but
I am a pianist, so might not work well for others.

>
>> Alt is better (Windows key too).
>
> Not all keyboards have the Windows key. If I had such a keyboard, I
> agree, I'd use that key.
>
>> Finally a dwm user should don't use suck - more application wich use the alt key ! ^^
>
> You mean like Firefox? Thunderbird? Gnumeric? etc.? This would save a
> lot of power, because the computer would be useless and thus I
> wouldn't turn it on.
>
>
>>
>> JPEC
>>
>> Donald Allen <donaldcallen_AT_gmail.com> a écrit :
>>
>>>I think the default key bindings for dwm are a unfortunate in some
>>>cases. For example, alt-f, a natural choice for *f*loat mode,
>>>conflicts with pulling down the File menu in many applications from
>>>the keyboard. alt-T similarly conflicts with using the Tools menu in
>>>Firefox from the keyboard.
>>>
>>>I realize that these bindings can be changed. But that requires some
>>>work (and knowledge of C) on the part of the user. I'm talking about
>>>the choice of the defaults. Perhaps the keys modified by alt should
>>>instead be modified by ctrl-alt by default? And similarly, alt-shift
>>>-> ctrl-alt-shift? I am going to test this idea by modifying my setup.
>>>I'll let you know how it works out.
>>>
>>>/Don
>>>
>>
>
Received on Wed Jul 22 2009 - 15:19:05 UTC