Re: Standardizing ConfigureRequest vs. size_inc hints

[Matthias Clasen <maclas gmx de>]

On Thu, 2002-08-08 at 23:18, Dominik Vogt wrote:

> 
> Let's assume we have a 100x100 client window with width_inc =
> height_inc = 10.  Consider this scenario.
> 
>  1) Window changes the ..._inc to 5.
>     [WM should resize window to 50x50]
>  2) Window resizes its window to 100x100
>     [New required size: 100x100]
>  3) Window changes the ..._inc to 20.
>     [New requiredd size: 400x400]
>

Dominik, I think the root of the problem is your assumption that the
wm should react to _inc changes by resizing the window. I can't find
any sentence in the ICCCM supporting this. The ICCCM is very clear
that clients should use a ConfigureRequest for changing the window size.
Thus the client in your scenario above is doing the right thing in step
2 in resizing the window itself to match the changed _inc. It would be
broken for the client to assume that changing the _inc is enough to
request a new window size. Do you know any clients doing this ? 
The example you cite, xterm, *does* resize the window after changing
the property. 

If we need to add anything about this to the EWMH, it should just be
a clarification that applications are responsible for requesting a
window size meeting the constraints of the WM_NORMAL_HINTS 
both a) at initial mapping time
and b) when they change the WM_NORMAL_HINTS later.
Window Managers should not react to WM_NORMAL_HINTS changes by changing
the size of the window, since that leads to race conditions.

Matthias