Re: [dev] [dwm] Optional status bar

From: Kurt H Maier <khm-suckless_AT_intma.in>
Date: Sat, 28 Jan 2012 11:35:49 -0500

On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 04:01:09PM -0000, Bjartur Thorlacius wrote:
> Dwm creates a dock (status bar) of its own and manages unlike any other x
> window. Dwm is configured to use a menu that, rather than being managed
> like any other x window, requests exemption from window management. By
> your logic, if dmenu is not best "rendered like any other x window" than
> dmenu is broken, and so is the status bar.

Your logic is inconsistent. The status bar and dwm are not 'managed
unlike any other x window' because they are not managed at all. This
is, in my opinion, a superior alternative to overengineering a
ridiculous set of specifications to accomplish the simple things that
dmenu and the status bar provide. ewmh is flawed because it presumes a
specific interface paradigm. it provides nothing that dmenu or the
status bar need that cannot be provided with override-redirect.

I'll agree dwm would be improved with a simple way to access a list of
tags and which clients are mapped to them, but I don't think that has
anything to do with adhering to a mostly-inapplicable x window
specification.

> A design decision moot by the very menu that dwm is configured for by
> default and maintained along with. Remove override-redirect from dmenu,
> and I'll believe this is a question of design.

Again, your logic is bad. dmenu's use of override-redirect is a big
part of why dmenu is so popular beyond dwm usage. Even the haskell guys
over at xmonad and the indescribable goons who make and use awesomewm
-- both groups use dmenu, because its simplicity and reliability is
pretty unassailable. Best of all, this list doesn't have to hear
whining about how dmenu isn't showing up right in <insert non-ewmh,
non-icccm window manager>. It, to coin a phrase, Just Works.
Received on Sat Jan 28 2012 - 17:35:49 CET