Re: [dwm] dwm-2.9

From: Tener Hades <>
Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2007 02:14:50 +0000 (UTC)

On 2007-01-08, Anselm R. Garbe <> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 08, 2007 at 03:57:02PM +0100, Antoni Grzymala wrote:
>> And I think an indicator of some sort will make it easier (perhaps some
>> quick visual clue instead of a number? like [***]=, just occured to me
>> that it might be easier for quick communication. You just see the
>> number, you don't have to read the arabic numeral :)).
> Don't make the things too complex. I changed hg tip accordingly
> to allow the following:
> #define TILESYMBOL "[%u]="
> Now the mode label is rendered based on the newly introduced
> mtext, which is updated whenever nmaster or arrange changes as
> follows:
> snprintf(mtext, sizeof mtext, arrange == dofloat ? FLOATSYMBOL : TILESYMBOL, nmaster);
> This change will be part of the dwm-3.0 release.
> Regards,

Semi-OT: Does dwm-2.[89] compile with X11R7? If not, that's something
I'd like to see in 3.0. I want to make a complete switch to X11R7, but
I refuse to leave dwm/dmenu behind.

Also, I'd really enjoy the functionality of 2.9/3.0 in regard to the
nmaster and mtext changes, but I'm hesitant to update because I prefer
the bottom stack to the tiled. So, I'd like to know 1.) if the bottom
stack patch will be implemented with these changes in mind, and 2.)
how? "[%u]TTT" or "=[%u]=" or similar? Will the master area be split
vertically/horizontally/both depending on landscape/portrait?

I'm unsure of how it would effect the LOC goal (last time I tested
was 2.6 + bstack = ~1,740 lines), but I'd also like to see the bottom
stack in the main dwm chain. When I first heard this suggested, I
didn't much like the idea, but now I use the bottom stack quite often.
And patching dwm and reusing my old config.h is getting more and more
complex with each release.


Xgwdto{ gphaiit pd dfreh_ ufhnj jq om dph]yc}a}o
Received on Tue Jan 09 2007 - 03:15:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Sun Jul 13 2008 - 14:34:26 UTC