Re: [dev] [dwm] default window attaching behaviour

From: dther <>
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2021 00:26:22 +1000

On 21/11/29 01:23PM, Mateusz Okulus wrote:
> On 21/11/29 06:25PM, dther wrote:
> > I've been thinking about dwm's default behaviours, ,,,
> As you say you launch new programs as you need them. This means the
> launched program should have highest priority because you want to use it
> right now. <...>
> so you want to open it, do something with it, then close it.

I see- I'd made an assumption here that I now realise doesn't apply to
all users. My tendency is to launch a few "big" programs,
most of which can't easily run in a terminal
(a browser, a terminal running tmux and/or an image editor), and only launch
new "temporary" terminals when I need to run and see the output of a
command. If I need an TUI volume mixer or something, I'd launch it as a tmux
window or in floating mode to avoid disturbing my layout.

> I'm not quite sure what do you mean by displacing the entire stack.
> <...>
> This might be confusing, but only if you open the window for later use.

Realised this is my personal preference- since most of my windows are
long running, I find it useful for them to occupy the same visual area
at all times, in case I need to look at them for reference.

> You'd need to be more specific about your use cases.
> <...> If my assumptions are correct, I'd reconsider if you really need that
> many programs opened in one view. I'd split programs between tags and
> use solutions like tmux or built-in windows.

You're probably right, honestly. My windows are tagged by "purpose"
(e.g. document paging, editing, etc),
and rather than using them like workspaces, I use a heavily modified
version of the old workspaces patch, with each "workspace" being like its
own dwm instance. I'm realising now that my ad-hoc tmux implementation
is hiding the fact that I'm using way too many windows at once.

Thanks for the explanation. Made me rethink how I use my windows,
and that I could probably do with a major rework of my dwm instance.

> All that being said, it was probably just for consistency. You'd
> expect new windows to go on the top of the stack, not the bottom.
> Whether it'd be better for most workflows probably wasn't even
> considered.

This makes sense ._.
Received on Tue Nov 30 2021 - 15:26:22 CET

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Tue Nov 30 2021 - 15:36:08 CET