On Mon, May 12, 2014 at 1:07 PM, Raphaël Proust <raphlalou_AT_gmail.com> wrote:
> [...]
> It makes sense. Although applications might be binding Shift+Mouse for
> their own purpose (not expecting X to interfere with their input). I
> don't care too much which is chosen because I tend to not use the
> mouse in the terminal, but I think it's worth considering and
> discussing a bit.
>
Definitely, is it enough to make ShiftMask configurable?
> We can rephrase the question: What are sane terminal managers? (And
> thus, which one should st make effort to work with?)
>
st should work (and generally does already work) well with tmux in my opinion.
>> As described in the post you linked
>> (http://lists.suckless.org/dev/1402/20050.html) maybe ShiftMask can be
>> added as a configurable shortcut to allow shortcuts using ShiftMask
>> and also allow things like rectangular (SEL_RECTANGULAR) to work?
>
> I think that an entry in config.c is a good idea. Then people can
> customise based on their terminal manager(s) of choice.
>
The attached updated patch makes ShiftMask configurable and allows to
use selmasks too (SEL_RECTANGULAR).
Kind regards,
Hiltjo
Received on Mon May 12 2014 - 14:19:28 CEST