From: Tilman S. <ti...@co...> - 2003-08-31 16:53:51
Attachments:
ecore_complete.patch
|
Hi, guess I really screwed up that _prop_layer_set() function as it didn't honour other atoms that might have been set by the WM. AFAIK, I did it right now. The attached patch includes all of the changes I made during the last three days, so you can forgot about those other patches ;p This new patch also adds _window_prop_sticky_set(), which sets/unsets the sticky state of a window. Please comment ;) -- Regards, Tilman |
From: Bellegarde C. <gn...@wa...> - 2003-09-02 20:00:12
|
I've always got some placement window problems :-/ E always put maximised windows(galeon remember it state) on panel when i have another window maximised... Another problem, sometime, some windows appears between two desktop, if i close the window and run again the same apps, all is ok, it's look like a strange bug... E16.6 buggy, Sawfish very very buggy(particulary with gnome-2.4), i don't want to use metacity :) |
From: Kim W. <ki...@wo...> - 2003-09-04 20:36:21
|
Bellegarde Cedric wrote: > I've always got some placement window problems :-/ E always put > maximised windows(galeon remember it state) on panel when i have another > window maximised... > Yes, window placement when low on space could be better. AFAICS galeon only remembers its size, which I consider a rather small state subset. > Another problem, sometime, some windows appears between two desktop, if > i close the window and run again the same apps, all is ok, it's look > like a strange bug... > This may happen if you had the application at that location in your last session (or maybe I don't understand the question). /Kim |
From: Tilman S. <ti...@co...> - 2003-09-21 06:08:56
|
Tilman Sauerbeck <ti...@co...> [2003-08-31 19:23]: > AFAIK, I did it right now. The attached patch includes all of the > changes I made during the last three days, so you can forgot about those > other patches ;p Okay, did anyone actually have a look at this patch? If it's not done right you need to tell me :) -- Regards, Tilman |
From: Carsten H. (T. R. <ra...@ra...> - 2003-09-21 22:43:16
|
On Sun, 21 Sep 2003 08:07:18 +0200 Tilman Sauerbeck <ti...@co...> babbled: > Tilman Sauerbeck <ti...@co...> [2003-08-31 19:23]: > > AFAIK, I did it right now. The attached patch includes all of the > > changes I made during the last three days, so you can forgot about those > > other patches ;p > > Okay, did anyone actually have a look at this patch? > If it's not done right you need to tell me :) sorry - havent even looked :) a bit of laziness going on atm. kwo? :) -- --------------- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am" -------------------- The Rasterman (Carsten Haitzler) ra...@ra... 熊耳 - 車君 ra...@de... Mobile Phone: +61 (0)413 451 899 Home Phone: 02 9698 8615 |
From: Kim W. <ki...@wo...> - 2003-09-22 18:19:36
|
Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) wrote: > On Sun, 21 Sep 2003 08:07:18 +0200 Tilman Sauerbeck <ti...@co...> > babbled: > > >>Tilman Sauerbeck <ti...@co...> [2003-08-31 19:23]: >> >>>AFAIK, I did it right now. The attached patch includes all of the >>>changes I made during the last three days, so you can forgot about those >>>other patches ;p >> >>Okay, did anyone actually have a look at this patch? >>If it's not done right you need to tell me :) > > > sorry - havent even looked :) a bit of laziness going on atm. > > kwo? :) > This is e17. Maybe some day ... :-) /Kim |
From: Carsten H. (T. R. <ra...@ra...> - 2003-09-22 22:40:16
|
On Mon, 22 Sep 2003 20:19:33 +0200 Kim Woelders <ki...@wo...> babbled: > Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) wrote: > > On Sun, 21 Sep 2003 08:07:18 +0200 Tilman Sauerbeck <ti...@co...> > > babbled: > > > > > >>Tilman Sauerbeck <ti...@co...> [2003-08-31 19:23]: > >> > >>>AFAIK, I did it right now. The attached patch includes all of the > >>>changes I made during the last three days, so you can forgot about those > >>>other patches ;p > >> > >>Okay, did anyone actually have a look at this patch? > >>If it's not done right you need to tell me :) > > > > > > sorry - havent even looked :) a bit of laziness going on atm. > > > > kwo? :) > > > This is e17. Maybe some day ... :-) > > /Kim oh yeah. good point. oops :) -- --------------- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am" -------------------- The Rasterman (Carsten Haitzler) ra...@ra... 熊耳 - 車君 ra...@de... Mobile Phone: +61 (0)413 451 899 Home Phone: 02 9698 8615 |
From: Carsten H. (T. R. <ra...@ra...> - 2003-09-22 23:12:44
|
On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 18:55:22 +0200 Tilman Sauerbeck <ti...@co...> babbled: > Hi, > guess I really screwed up that _prop_layer_set() function as it didn't > honour other atoms that might have been set by the WM. > > AFAIK, I did it right now. The attached patch includes all of the > changes I made during the last three days, so you can forgot about those > other patches ;p > > This new patch also adds _window_prop_sticky_set(), which sets/unsets > the sticky state of a window. > > Please comment ;) ok comments. i'm not sure about ecore_x_window_prop_delete_request_set() being deleted and replaced by ecore_x_window_prop_protocol_set() calls. though i can see where you're getting at. not sure there. what's your reasoning here? -- --------------- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am" -------------------- The Rasterman (Carsten Haitzler) ra...@ra... 熊耳 - 車君 ra...@de... Mobile Phone: +61 (0)413 451 899 Home Phone: 02 9698 8615 |
From: Tilman S. <ti...@ww...> - 2003-09-23 10:20:42
|
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 09:12:28 +1000, Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) wrote > On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 18:55:22 +0200 Tilman Sauerbeck <ti...@co...> > babbled: > > > guess I really screwed up that _prop_layer_set() function as it didn't > > honour other atoms that might have been set by the WM. > > > > AFAIK, I did it right now. The attached patch includes all of the > > changes I made during the last three days, so you can forgot about those > > other patches ;p > > > > This new patch also adds _window_prop_sticky_set(), which sets/unsets > > the sticky state of a window. > > > > Please comment ;) > > i'm not sure about ecore_x_window_prop_delete_request_set() being > deleted and replaced by ecore_x_window_prop_protocol_set() calls. > though i can see where you're getting at. not sure there. what's > your reasoning here? The "delete request" is _one_ atom out of the group of "protocol" atoms. IMHO it makes sense to specify the atom to set in a function parameter instead of writing a function for each "protocol" atom: ecore_x_window_prop_delete_request_set(), ecore_x_window_prop_take_focus_set(), etc. At the moment, there are just two atoms in the enumeration, but IIRC, there are some more which might be implemented in ecore_x in the future as well. Using a single function keeps the code clean, duplicating code sucks ;) If you guys don't like this approach, I can change it back, though I don't see the disadvantage in doing it the way I did :) Regards, Tilman |
From: Carsten H. (T. R. <ra...@ra...> - 2003-09-23 22:54:04
|
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 11:20:19 +0100 "Tilman Sauerbeck" <ti...@ww...> babbled: > At the moment, there are just two atoms in the enumeration, but IIRC, there > are some more which might be implemented in ecore_x in the future as well. there might be.. but i have never seen those wm protocols atoms expanded before.. so i never expected it as such :) i didnt want to expose the implimentation at the api level... but i do see your point :) > Using a single function keeps the code clean, duplicating code sucks ;) then again also does 1 function does all - you just need to remember the 80000 options to it too :) hehehhe > If you guys don't like this approach, I can change it back, though I don't see > the disadvantage in doing it the way I did :) patch is in :) see cvs :) > Regards, > Tilman -- --------------- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am" -------------------- The Rasterman (Carsten Haitzler) ra...@ra... 熊耳 - 車君 ra...@de... Mobile Phone: +61 (0)413 451 899 Home Phone: 02 9698 8615 |
From: Tilman S. <ti...@co...> - 2003-09-24 14:42:32
|
Carsten Haitzler <ra...@ra...> [2003-09-24 15:52]: > > Using a single function keeps the code clean, duplicating code sucks ;) > > then again also does 1 function does all - you just need to remember the 80000 > options to it too :) hehehhe Yeah. It's probably just a matter of personal preference. I like it better this way, you prefer the other way - do what you feel. Both will work in this case ;) > > If you guys don't like this approach, I can change it back, though I don't see > > the disadvantage in doing it the way I did :) > > patch is in :) see cvs :) Thanks :) -- Regards, Tilman |