Re: Review: FULLSCREEN_MONITORS Hint

["Elijah Newren" <newren gmail com>]

On Nov 27, 2007 3:40 PM, Grant Patterson <grantp vmware com> wrote:
> On Nov 24, 2007, at 11:48 a, Mark Tiefenbruck wrote:
> >
> > Presumably the monitors used will be a rectangular array. You could
> > just specify a top-left and bottom-right monitor. Or maybe it would be
> > easier to specify x- and y-coordinates in the root window, since
> > monitors tend to be of different sizes. It really depends on what the
> > applications are, I think.
>
> Both of those are interesting ideas, in particular specifying root
> window coordinates. That would make this a bigger hint/property: an
> application could essentially place its window anywhere it wants,
> which might be more leeway than people are comfortable with. There
> could be some kind of sanity checking, but expecting the WM to
> confirm that the given coordinates actually specify a union of
> monitors would necessitate implementing a rather messy algorithm in
> each WM. What do people think about specifying x/y/width/height
> instead of a list of monitor indices?

I'd rather it were just a width/height -- measured in monitors rather
than pixels -- than either of those two choices.  Does that make
sense?  Sure, WMs would have to figure out how to squeeze the window
appropriately if the window was on monitors of different sizes, but
that's no different than the original hint either.  Also, I don't see
why the x & y should be hardcoded in the message (an initial placement
hint, maybe?)  -- does it not make sense to let the user move the
virtual machine "window" to some different set of monitors with the
same overall size?


Just my $0.02,
Elijah