Re: FVWM: Why use fvwm 2.0?

From: Kai Grossjohann <grossjoh_at_charly.informatik.uni-dortmund.de>
Date: 25 Mar 1996 09:06:29 +0100

>>>>> On Fri, 22 Mar 1996 17:07:35 -0800, schaefer_at_z-code.ncd.com
>>>>> (Barton E. Schaefer) said:

  Barton> One other setting that I don't currently use, but that I've
  Barton> played with in the past, is DontMoveOff. The FAQ says
  Barton> there's no equivalent; what is the closest similar effect?

There is EdgeResistance where you can set a number of pixels. The
window won't be moved off-screen unless you move it off-screen by more
than that number of pixels.

  Barton> I could probably live without these if somebody can suggest
  Barton> how to get the closest possible behavior out of Next and
  Barton> Prev, but I haven't found any explanation in the mailing
  Barton> list archives for why they were dropped.

IMVHO, Next and Prev are the greatest thing under the sun. While
they're not compatible to CirculateUp and CirculateDown, they do what
I have always wished Circulate{Up,Down} to do: With Circulate, the
movement is in a window ring where the relative positions of the
windows are based on the time of creation of the windows. (This may
be completely wrong as my idea of what the Circulate functions do is
based on twm not fvwm...)

With Next/Prev the relative position of the windows is based on the
order of `visiting' them, i.e. with Prev I can go to the last window I
was in before the current one.

        kai
--
There ain't no cure for the summer time blues.
--
Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL:http://www.hpc.uh.edu/fvwm/>.
To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm" in the body of a
message to majordomo_at_hpc.uh.edu.
To report problems, send mail to fvwm-owner_at_hpc.uh.edu.
Received on Mon Mar 25 1996 - 02:06:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Mon Aug 29 2016 - 19:37:58 BST