[clfswm-devel] rearrange windows

[Philippe Brochard]

Fernando Aguayo writes:

>> Done in the last commit. In fact, I've added 8 lines (Lisp is
>> wonderful!) to let you choose to keep or not children position in all
>> tile layout since this can be useful sometimes. 
>> 
>> Please, test!
>
> Works like a charm! thank you!
>
Ok, nice!

>> 
>> While you seem to use tile layout, what do you think about impair
>> frame-children? Actually there is a blank for the unused
>> child. Something like this:
>> 
>> +----+----+
>> | F1 |  2 |
>> +----+----+
>> |  3 |  B |   B: blank  F: focused child
>> +----+----+
>> 
>> What do you think about the blank filled by the focused child? Something
>> like this:
>> 
>> +----+----+
>> |   F1    |
>> +----+----+
>> |  2 |  3 |   B: blank (no more)  F: focused child
>> +----+----+
>> 
>> 
> Yes, I noted that, and I was thinking in making a patch to change
> this. The problematic point is that it could get a bit ambiguous. For
> example, what happens when you have 5 windows? You probably want 3
> columns and 2 rows, but which cell gets the extra space?  That's why I
> prefer manual tiling, but in my opinion, for that you also need some
> way to interactively resize the partition of the frame.
>
> So I'm really not sure, but maybe just granting the first one more
> room is good enough.
>
Well, I've made the choice (in the last commit) to expand the focused
child in the blank area and to push others children in the remaining
area.
What do you think about this?

>> 
>> >> 
>> >> Note: The funny thing is that the function you want is the first I've
>> >> written in clfswm-layout. And I've really thinking hard to keep children
>> >> in there position :)
>> >> 
>> >
>> > Probably that's the more general way to go, It's just I'm probably too
>> > used to other manual tilers :P
>> >
>> Arf, in fact I'd like clfswm to be turned in any tiled (or not) window
>> manager following user request. This let us freedom to (auto)arange
>> windows as we like.
>
> That would be great, but also very complicated. I think the number of
> options is already good. Just need some little tweakings :)
>
Yes there is already a large number of choices. But I hope CLFSWM let us
invent some others if needed.



> Again, thank you, I'm really enjoing using this wm.
>
Great! Feel free to report anything that could improve CLFSWM.

Regards,

Philippe