Re: [dev] I'm back

From: Ruben Mikkonen <>
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2012 20:53:47 +0200


On Sat, 17 Nov 2012, Anselm R Garbe wrote:
> (iii) A third idea is an old idea that 20h brought into the discussion
> when investigating 2wm. The man page of 2wm mentions sbar, which was
> abandoned a couple of years ago. My question here is:
> -> is there anyone who uses the mouse functionality of the dwm bar
> right now? Could you live without it?
> I barely use the mouse for the dwm bar and would be in favour for
> removing the bar altogether from dwm. Instead I would output the
> current dwm state to stdout which could be used by a different program
> like sbar for input. But I wouldn't add an interface to dwm to change
> the tags through X props or some other command interface (like stdin
> processing) to allow other programs to amend the dwm tags. Good old
> key commands would be enough for me.

I think removing the hardcoded bar from dwm is quite a good idea. I've
never found any real use of it.

However, why would dwm need draw{.h,c} if there were no bar? Window
borders? They're imo somewhat useless: a) If a window is a terminal
window, then you easily see from the cursor if it's active. b) Otherwise
you most likely need the mouse anyway, and focus follows mouse, so you
don't have to know wheter it's already active or not.

Received on Sat Nov 17 2012 - 19:53:47 CET

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sat Nov 17 2012 - 20:00:07 CET