On Mon, 7 Nov 2011 22:28:59 -0800 "Suraj N. Kurapati" <sun...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Thu 03 Nov 2011 09:57:19 AM PDT, Kurt H Maier wrote: >> There is nothing "suckless" about any aspect of modern wmii > >I thought Suckless folks were enthusiastic about Plan9 technologies; >has this changed? If so, why? > >And how is "modern" wmii different from its, let's say, "pre-modern" >phase? From my view, it still uses the Plan9 protocol and the Plan9 >approach of exposing a virtual filesystem for operation by the user. > >Thanks for your consideration. > Window management in X is quite simple and limited task. We could expose a virtual file system for operation by the user if we would build Window System - X replacement. Such system could possibly gain something by a virtual file system. As for managing windows in X we have now for quite a time something far more superior - dwm. Now you can just work and window manager will manage your windows - that's modern part. Conclusion: wmii - manual window management (is it still management then if it's manual? - more like manual window placement): 30k SLOC + Nk SLOC configuration dwm - dynamic window management: <2k SLOC Any questions?
