Re: [dwm] {V,H}RATIO

On Thu, Aug 09, 2007 at 03:08:56PM +0200, pancake wrote:
> Hi, i have finally patched my dwm with the latests mercurial
> changes. and this is my config:
>
> { MODKEY, XK_h, inchratio, ".1" }, \
> { MODKEY, XK_l, inchratio, "-.1" }, \
> { MODKEY|ShiftMask, XK_h, inchratio, ".2" }, \
> { MODKEY|ShiftMask, XK_l, inchratio, "-.2" }, \
> { MODKEY|ControlMask, XK_j, incvratio, "-.1" }, \
> { MODKEY|ControlMask, XK_k, incvratio, ".1" }, \
> { MODKEY|ShiftMask, XK_j, incnmaster, "1" }, \
> { MODKEY|ShiftMask, XK_k, incnmaster, "-1" }, \
>
> The acceleration with inchratio is really soft and cool . Nice hit. But i would like
> to be able to make the masterw smaller than the possible with the inchratio approach.
>
> These limits makes dwm look more claustrofobic. :)
>
> But i hardly dislike the incvmaster failsafe that makes clients dissapear from
> the view. This breaks the dwm basics and makes the environment more confusing.
>
> I would remove this. or at least make it optional, but adopting the clientspertag
> patch youll get a similar effect without collateral damages and with a more flexible
> approach. Please consider it.

Actually, more and more I come to the same conclusion. The ratio
stuff just feels wrong. I also think the NMASTER thing feels
wrong and should/might be removed.

What is the impression of others regarding this?

Regards,

-- 
 Anselm R. Garbe >< http://www.suckless.org/ >< GPG key: 0D73F361