On 31 October 2011 19:12, Jeremy Jackins wrote:
>> So in other words, if we can say tha majority use cases are:
>>
>> nmaster: 1-2
>> ncol (slave cols): 1-2
>
> Hm, so are we no longer considering bstack? I agree that mod-shift-t
> would be a nice way to do nmaster=2, but this means that with more
On 31 October 2011 20:31, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> On 31 October 2011 20:28, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
>> Also, having special
>> 'set' bindings instead of the simple I-to-Increase, D-to-Decrease, is
>> far harder to remember.
>
> An afterthought: if it's the number of bound keys which is worryi
On 31 October 2011 20:28, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> Also, having special
> 'set' bindings instead of the simple I-to-Increase, D-to-Decrease, is
> far harder to remember.
An afterthought: if it's the number of bound keys which is worrying
you, why not make, e.g., Mod-n increase nmaster, and Mod-
On 31 October 2011 10:01, Anselm R Garbe wrote:
> That's why I asked what the usual non-default ncol settings are, I
> guess nearly no one exceeds 3 colums.
>
> So in other words, if we can say tha majority use cases are:
>
> nmaster: 1-2
I honestly think removing incnmaster for some 'setnmaster'
> So in other words, if we can say tha majority use cases are:
>
> nmaster: 1-2
> ncol (slave cols): 1-2
Hm, so are we no longer considering bstack? I agree that mod-shift-t
would be a nice way to do nmaster=2, but this means that with more
than two windows I'm stuck a stack on the side and I've l
2011/10/31 Anselm R Garbe :
> That's why I asked what the usual non-default ncol settings are, I
> guess nearly no one exceeds 3 colums.
>
> So in other words, if we can say tha majority use cases are:
>
> nmaster: 1-2
> ncol (slave cols): 1-2
To avoid confusion: the ncol layout that I use has col
On 31 October 2011 09:50, Thomas Dahms wrote:
> 2011/10/31 Anselm R Garbe :
>> Ok, if the majority rarly increases nmaster to 3, I would suggest the
>> approach to have setnmaster() rather than incnmaster(). Then one could
>> define:
>>
>> Mod1-t: setnmaster(1); setlayout(tile);
>> Mod1-Shift-t: s
2011/10/31 Anselm R Garbe :
> Ok, if the majority rarly increases nmaster to 3, I would suggest the
> approach to have setnmaster() rather than incnmaster(). Then one could
> define:
>
> Mod1-t: setnmaster(1); setlayout(tile);
> Mod1-Shift-t: setnmaster(2); setlayout(tile);
What about some people
On 31 October 2011 09:39, Thomas Dahms wrote:
> 2011/10/31 Anselm R Garbe :
>> So after having clarified the question about if you'd change nmaster
>> dynamically, I'd like to clarify this
>>
>> question:
>>
>> --> What is your typical range of nmaster in reality? Is it just 1-2
>> or even 1-3 or
2011/10/31 Anselm R Garbe :
> So after having clarified the question about if you'd change nmaster
> dynamically, I'd like to clarify this
>
> question:
>
> --> What is your typical range of nmaster in reality? Is it just 1-2
> or even 1-3 or more?
I use ncol with nmaster=2 most of the time. On sm
On 30 October 2011 23:02, pancake wrote:
> When nmaster was released I was a heavy user of it.. And definitively when I
> stopped using it I didnt really miss it.
Same here. My current tendency is skipping nmaster in vanilla dwm in
favor for rather bstack and perhaps ncol. I find it really
conce
On 31 October 2011 05:42, Jeremy Jackins wrote:
>> keybinding), so increasing nmaster and moving that window into the
> s/increasing/decreasing/
Is it correct that you'd decrease to nmaster=0?
Anyhow, I more and more believe that incnmaster is the only sensible
approach, at least it has a clear
> keybinding), so increasing nmaster and moving that window into the
s/increasing/decreasing/
> ... Anyway it seems like my
> explanation isn't clear so I'll try to implement it and post a patch
Okay, so not knowing the dwm source very well I'm having trouble
implementing this, but I think these
> But, how would you be able to decrease the nmaster number?
Focus a window in master and press alt+shift+enter (or whatever
keybinding), so increasing nmaster and moving that window into the
stack. Instead of choosing the nmaster number and letting the windows
arrange themselves appropriately, yo
On Oct 30, 2011, at 5:49 PM, Jeremy Jackins wrote:
I'm sure someone has thought of this before but it came to me as a
nice way to allow multiple clients in master:
Pretending for a moment that mod+shift+return didn't spawn a terminal
by default, what if we had something like:
- mod+return switc
I'm sure someone has thought of this before but it came to me as a
nice way to allow multiple clients in master:
Pretending for a moment that mod+shift+return didn't spawn a terminal
by default, what if we had something like:
- mod+return switches focused window in and out of master, like normal
When nmaster was released I was a heavy user of it.. And definitively when I
stopped using it I didnt really miss it.
I find it useful just in few situations, like when coding on 4:3 screen and
needing to read a manpage or src and another src at the same time.
Another use was to get a 2|1 layou
> This leads me to the question to long-time users of nmaster: Do you
> guys adjust nmaster frequently, or do you just stick to a particular
> setting? I guess the latter... Please let me know.
I got one 1680x1050 screen and most of the time I work with one window
in the master column. Being able
On 30 October 2011 20:13, Anselm R Garbe wrote:
> As for the nmaster discussion: I think what I really dislike is the
> fact that adjusting nmaster requires 2 key combos. What I could live
> with is fixing nmaster in config.h.
>
> This leads me to the question to long-time users of nmaster: Do you
On 30 October 2011 00:14, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
> * Thomas Dahms [2011-10-29 14:11:59 +0200]:
>> Concerning bstack, I don't find any use for this with wide screens
>> (16:10 or even 16:9) becoming mainstream.
>
> some ppl use rotated screens
> even a 3:4 aspect ratio makes
> vertical splitting bad
* Thomas Dahms [2011-10-29 14:11:59 +0200]:
> Concerning bstack, I don't find any use for this with wide screens
> (16:10 or even 16:9) becoming mainstream.
>
some ppl use rotated screens
even a 3:4 aspect ratio makes
vertical splitting bad
not to mention 9:16
2011/10/29 Anselm R Garbe :
> I'm not really convinced nmaster should be mainstream, rather I
> believe that bstack and tile are a better compromise, but I need to
> work with this setup a bit more during this weekend to make up my
> mind.
I never used the regular nmaster layout (ntile), but ncol
On 26 October 2011 13:28, Thomas Dahms wrote:
> with nmaster becoming mainstream (again), what was known as the
> nmaster-ncol patch can also be simplified a lot. Attached file
> provides a layout that arranges clients in columns in the master area.
> Maybe someone finds it useful.
I'm not really
Hi list,
with nmaster becoming mainstream (again), what was known as the
nmaster-ncol patch can also be simplified a lot. Attached file
provides a layout that arranges clients in columns in the master area.
Maybe someone finds it useful.
--
Thomas Dahms
void
ncol(Monitor *m) {
unsigned int i, n
Cool :)
add it to the web.
On 12/10/10 10:40, Johannes Hofmann wrote:
Hi,
for today's widescreen monitors I find it quite nice to have two
master areas side by side.
Attached extended nmaster.c makes this possible with the ncol
layout. Include nmaster.c as usual and add an entry
{ "||=",
Hi,
for today's widescreen monitors I find it quite nice to have two
master areas side by side.
Attached extended nmaster.c makes this possible with the ncol
layout. Include nmaster.c as usual and add an entry
{ "||=", ncol },
to layouts.
Cheers,
Johannes
enum {MaxMon = 8};
static int
26 matches
Mail list logo
