On Sun, Jul 12, 2009 at 3:39 AM, Preben Randhol<randhol_AT_pvv.org> wrote:
> Hope you are not doing any real life coding...
Sorry to dash your hopes.
> So per-tag is weird and bizarre? Not that every time one go to tag
> X one need to press Modx-M and then when returning to tag Y you have to
> press Modx-t? Out of 365 days per year, let say one use dwm 300 and
> changing tag about 30 times per day. That comes to 90 000 useless
> keystrokes. Is this the "dynamic" you talked about?
Those are some fabulous imaginary numbers that don't really apply. If
I found myself doing work like that I'd probably use a nice
workspace-based window manager. Instead, I don't have a set 'layout',
and I just add and remove clients and groups of clients to and from
the stack. If I had to keep in my head which layout was applied to
each of my ten tags, I'd have to think about my window management, and
the reason I use dwm is to let the computer do that for me.
> If you have a huge screen with high resolution you probably can work in
> tiled only, but not so one a notebook or a smaller monitor.
Older versions of dwm's description specified that it was for
high-resolution screens. I wish they'd put that back. You *can* buy
high-resolution notebooks. I have one.
> Well, I would say that support for multiple monitors should then not be
> part of dwm, but be a patchwork as it is bizarre to need multiple
> hardware when we have tags.
I don't think you understand tags.
> Right answer is to make the code readable and modular.
Thank you for your agreement on this matter.
-- # Kurt H MaierReceived on Sun Jul 12 2009 - 12:41:43 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Sun Jul 12 2009 - 12:48:01 UTC