Re: [IMPORTANT] EdgeActions ready (+ setup guide)

[Christopher Roy Bratusek <zanghar freenet de>]

Am Samstag 27 November 2010, 05:50:29 schrieb Teika Kazura:
> Thanks Chris for quick change. Now it's much better.
> 
> But, sorry for being rash, let me propose one more possibility:
> (I'm not asking you this, just take it as an idea.) Put one option
> "Action for screen edge" implying 4 directions, instead of each of
> vert & horiz. And a checkbox "enable window dragging across screen
> edges" which defaults to true.
> 
> The basic idea is that any "complex" edge configuration needs a
> couple of lines of lisp, so keep the GUI to the most likeliest one.
> Examples in doc will be nice, which are rare in our current info.

Well, I think that the current UI is pretty fine and provides biggest 
configurabilty/flexibility possible (except for sawfishrc). I don't wanna trimm 
it down more than I just did.

> > Current default is „do nothing“. Any suggestions for other defaults[...]
> 
> I think it's ok.

OK.

> > Well I have 2 . 2 workspaces. [...] Though it's not 100% working:
> > right-flip on firsth WS moves to fourth instead of third WS:
> > 
> > 1* | 3 ==> 1 | 3
> > 2  | 4 ==> 2 | 4*
> 
> See ext/workspace-grid.jl. I don't need this, so I don't work on this.

No problem. I doubt I'll check on this (better things to do).

> >> On the delay:
> > Now it is:
> > - VD: no delay
> > - EF: full delay
> > - HS: half delay
> 
> Oh, oh, I guessed (I don't use mouse) the opposite; that HS might need
> longer delay to cancel. :) I don't know which is good, but to make the
> configurator look tidy, it's better to split the option to two. (Only
> the appearance. It's better for me to leave it to you.)
> 
> And I have a question: what's the difference between "none" and
> "hot-spot" for the *-edge-func? It's difficult to see.

None means nothing, while hot-spot can be anything (internal command or 
external application). I know what you mean is the default value, there HS and 
none equal in the end.

> # Radio buttons in the configurator would help this; it would enable to
> # seperate the lisp return value and the printed description. Current
> # "choice" type forces lisp symbol, so not much descriptive.
> 
> >> * Relegate some functions in C to lisp, so that it can be used for
> >> 
> >>   multi-head dead-zone problem, too. Currently C functions are
> >>   not exported from lisp modules, so it can be after the release,
> >>   but it's better to combine API changes in one release.
> > 
> > adding them as SUBRS isn't enough? Or do you plan on more work?
> 
> I'll do it, when I feel like. To apply it to dead-zone, geometry has
> to be specified, and several flippers may be created, so it's easier
> to manage flipper windows in lisp, say with a list, or returning
> each to users. (Of course you don't have to pass 4 edges to users.)

OK

> >> * Rename src/flippers to src/edge.
> > 
> > ... I doubt that. flippers != edges. What we do in C is handling the
> > flippers, edges are handled in LISP.
> 
> It's because the word "flip" means turning a page leaf, so not for
> VD. When it's used in dead-zone, "edge" may not be best, but I don't
> know better name. (Even in dead-zone, it's not X edge which contains
> dead-zones, but it's edge in natural sense, the screen's border.)

Hmm... dunno.  

> > I doubt there will be much 'others'. So again it's our points of view. ;)
> 
> Fine observation. ;] (bracket = GSR style :)
> 
> Now are we ready to merge it to HEAD?

We are. :D

> 
> Teika (Teika kazura)

Chris