On Thu, 30 Jan 2014 18:32:33 +0000 Chris Michael <devilho...@comcast.net> wrote:
> If it is left to the User, than the argument is Moot !!!!! > > They can add/del Any Number of Matches that They wish ... > Just NOT in favor of a billion App Name matches through Our codebase !! I hardly think we'll end up with half that number. People here are too lazy to bother adding them. > > I am NOT saying You're commit is bad !! I am simply saying: "At What > Point do we Draw a line and Stop adding Specific Names" to our codebase ?? If it becomes a problem then we can make decisions at that point. I'm skeptical that there's a need for it. > > Yea, You use Geany so this is Helpful to SOME developers ... but Where > does this stop ?? (That is my argument). It stops when someone wants to add matches for apps that nobody else uses or has heard of, or when it starts becoming a memory/performance issue. > > Not technical ! Technically, you are correct... But a line has to be > drawn Somewhere....Else we end up w/ 1 million app names in our > codebase... If the USER wants to add more, then Fine !! That is not Up > to Us... > > That's all I am saying Mike. It's not Personal, HELL It's not even > Technical .... But where do we STOP adding app names ?? ;) I'm not trying to make it personal, I'm just not using smiley faces after every sentence ;):):P:D:D:D > > dh > > On 30/01/14 18:23, Michael Blumenkrantz wrote: > > On Thu, 30 Jan 2014 18:19:51 +0000 > > Chris Michael <devilho...@comcast.net> wrote: > > > >> I am arguing against adding 9,000 corner cases for various app names > >> that don't behave !! Hate to see ANY of the code littered with: > >> > >> If App Name == "Some Dumb App"; Do This > >> > >> type of bullshit. We've been there before. It sucked then, It will still > >> suck !! > >> > >> That is all I am saying. I have no "Technical" argument against your > >> "specific" commit ... > >> > >> I just Don't want to see this this Horrible pattern of: "If This App, Do > >> This" across the whole code base !! > >> > >> dh > > > > This seems to be arguing against the concept of comp matches in the first > > place since, in theory, a user could create 9,000 comp matches, which would > > cause the matching code to become exactly as you described after loop > > unrolling. > > > > In the case where adding an application-specific match for a common > > application dramatically improves the user experience, I think it's > > worthwhile to add it. > > > >> > >> > >> On 30/01/14 18:12, Michael Blumenkrantz wrote: > >>> On Thu, 30 Jan 2014 18:06:01 +0000 Chris Michael > >>> <devilho...@comcast.net> wrote: > >>> > >>>> On 30/01/14 18:00, Michael Blumenkrantz wrote: > >>>>> I'm fine with adding more cases for commonly used applications if > >>>>> it results in a more positive experience for users. At worst it > >>>>> will just require that some of the infrastructure be optimized a > >>>>> little. > >>>>> > >>>> And I am 900% in favor of that!!! ;) > >>>> > >>>> But adding things based on App Name is destined to fail eventually > >>>> ... You Cannot Possibly Cover ALLL possible app names is what I am > >>>> saying ...Has to be a better way ;) > >>>> > >>>> Not against the idea. I love it !! Just against the "trap this > >>>> name" theory ;) > >>>> > >>>> dh > >>> > >>> I don't understand what your argument is. The point of comp matches > >>> is so that you can match against properties such as the name, but > >>> you're arguing against matching the name as a property? > >>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> On Thu, 30 Jan 2014 17:58:21 +0000 Chris Michael > >>>>> <devilho...@comcast.net> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> Fair enough .... in But "allowing this" to happen means there > >>>>>> are a (possible) million cases where we need to do this again > >>>>>> ... > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Simply wondering "Is there Not a Better Way ?" > >>>>>> > >>>>>> dh > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On 30/01/14 17:52, Michael Blumenkrantz wrote: > >>>>>>> Except that they can't be added generically, which is the > >>>>>>> entire reason why specific matches exist. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Thu, 30 Jan 2014 17:49:14 +0000 Chris Michael > >>>>>>> <devilho...@comcast.net> wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> IMO, would make more sense to add them Generically based on > >>>>>>>> window type or class or something.... > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> To add them based on app name or something is sheer > >>>>>>>> sillines... > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> dh > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On 30/01/14 17:12, Mike Blumenkrantz wrote: > >>>>>>>>> discomfitor pushed a commit to branch master. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> http://git.enlightenment.org/core/enlightenment.git/commit/?id=5c5a89bfecc85a86d2d17b92f6743a0dabe0820b > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >> commit 5c5a89bfecc85a86d2d17b92f6743a0dabe0820b > >>>>>>>>> Author: Mike Blumenkrantz <zm...@samsung.com> Date: Thu > >>>>>>>>> Jan 30 10:45:46 2014 -0500 > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> add default comp match for geany autocompete window > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> given that we're compositing-only now, we should be > >>>>>>>>> adding more of these for common apps to improve the user > >>>>>>>>> experience on a base configuration --- > >>>>>>>>> src/bin/e_comp_cfdata.c | 7 +++++++ 1 file changed, 7 > >>>>>>>>> insertions(+) > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> diff --git a/src/bin/e_comp_cfdata.c > >>>>>>>>> b/src/bin/e_comp_cfdata.c index c2bd566..428e54c 100644 > >>>>>>>>> --- a/src/bin/e_comp_cfdata.c +++ > >>>>>>>>> b/src/bin/e_comp_cfdata.c @@ -170,6 +170,13 @@ > >>>>>>>>> e_comp_cfdata_config_new(void) > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> mat = E_NEW(E_Comp_Match, 1); cfg->match.overrides = > >>>>>>>>> eina_list_append(cfg->match.overrides, mat); + > >>>>>>>>> mat->name = eina_stringshare_add("geany"); + mat->clas > >>>>>>>>> = eina_stringshare_add("Geany"); + mat->primary_type = > >>>>>>>>> E_WINDOW_TYPE_NORMAL; + mat->shadow_style = > >>>>>>>>> eina_stringshare_add("still"); + + mat = > >>>>>>>>> E_NEW(E_Comp_Match, 1); + cfg->match.overrides = > >>>>>>>>> eina_list_append(cfg->match.overrides, mat); > >>>>>>>>> mat->shadow_style = eina_stringshare_add("popup"); > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> cfg->match.menus = NULL; > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ WatchGuard Dimension instantly turns raw network data into actionable security intelligence. It gives you real-time visual feedback on key security issues and trends. Skip the complicated setup - simply import a virtual appliance and go from zero to informed in seconds. http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=123612991&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
