On 27 Mar 2003 16:35:33 +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 27, 2003 at 03:24:32PM +0000, Mikhael Goikhman wrote: > > On 27 Mar 2003 15:15:30 +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 27, 2003 at 01:35:05PM +0000, Mikhael Goikhman wrote: > > > > On 27 Mar 2003 14:27:30 +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote: > > > > > > > > > > How difficult is it to make module aliases to work with KillModule > > > > > too? > > > > > > > > This works since 2.3.x: > > > > > > > > Module FvwmButtons MyLeftTopBar > > > > KillModule FvwmButtons MyLeftTopBar > > > > > > > > And "KillModule FvwmButtons" kills all aliases. > > > > > > I see. Is there any reason why I can't say just > > > > > > KillModule MyLeftTopBar > > > > Will then "KillModule FvwmButtons" mean kill only one alias (no alias) > > or all aliases? > > Only one.
This breaks compatibility with the way it always worked (all FvwmButtons instances are closed) and does not add anything that is not already possible using KillModule. > How about pattern matching as in DestroyModuleConfig: > > KillModule FvwmButtons* Pattern on what? Module name (the first Module argument) or module alias (usually the second Module argument, but not always, it's heuristics)? I don't like the way we currently mix these two, we did this in the past, but we should not do this in the future if we want a non-ambiguous clean way of working with modules. We should have 2 levels, one for module names and one for instance names instead of global mixing of everything in one namespace. I have a proper and convenient solution for this, but it is a bit revolutional to be discussed now. Maybe after 2.6. Regards, Mikhael. -- Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL:http://www.fvwm.org/>. To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm-workers" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To report problems, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
