Without commenting on all particular statement in this discussion, I want to make clear why I think it's a bad idea to leave the decision about grab/nograb to the user:
1) The user has *no* idea of the implications and can not make
a proper decision. Hell, even something as simple as this may
freeze fvwm:
AddToFunc foobar I CursorMove 10p 10p
How are we going to explain that to the user? The usability
of that feature would be horrible: either we explain it in
length. Then nobody would be able to use it. Or we don't
explain it at all and everybody writes unsafe functions.
2) It would be a maintenance nightmare. When something strange
happens, there is always the possibility of some random
interaction that we would never pin down.
In my eyes, such a feature is *unmaintainable*.
--
On Wed, Jun 28, 2006 at 11:39:13PM +0000, Mikhael Goikhman wrote:
> On 29 Jun 2006 00:44:22 +0200, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> > We would have to exclude at least:
> >
> > * Anything that can generate dynamic functions because it is
> > impossible to decide about whether a grab is needed (Read,
> > PipeRead, expanding variables or environment variables).
>
> We are speaking about a user who knows what these Read and PipeRead
> commands do. I am not sure why you insist on automatic detection only.
See my reasoning above. The user most certainly does *not* know
what he is doing.
> > * Commands calling or manipulating functions (AddToFunc,
> > DestroyFunc, calling a sub-function).
>
> Again, these may be pretty safe, a user should be able to specify NoGrab
> flag here.
No, because calling and modifying sub-functions can change whether
a function is a valid "nograb" function or not.
> > * Any other command that may grab the pointer itself (e.g. Exec).
>
> The same with Exec (a user knows better).
Um, I meant Wait, not Exec.
--
> I don't think a possible problem with NoGrab are that critical. If a user
> wants to get some nograb-related failures, he should be able to do so.
> There is no good reason the user has no relable way to do this currently:
>
> DefineFunc UpdateTitlePeriodically NoGrab
> + I PipeRead `printf "SetEnv DATE "; date +%Y-%m-%d`
> + I SendToModule FvwmButtons-Panel ChangeButton ... $[DATE]
> + I Schedule 20000 UpdateTitlePeriodically
Wait a minute, the "nograb" stuff does *not* solve this problem.
It is still possible that a command in a nograb function needs to
grab the pointer. It it does not get it, the function is
terminated and the command is not rescheduled either (e.g. the
Wait command).
--
> Well, years ago I suggested to make "I" specifier optional in functions,
> because 90% of functions are immediate and there is no confusion if "I"
> is omitted.
But there is abiguity. Fvwm would now be able to distinguish
between
+ Iconify off
and
+ I off
as well as
+ I foobar
+ I I foobar
> But there was no agreement. I would say that AllImmediate
> flag is redundant (may be a default). This may be discussed after 2.6.0.
--
@Scott: I was suggesting a whitelist, not a blacklist. I.e. if
in doubt, forbid it.
Ciao
Dominik ^_^ ^_^
--
Dominik Vogt, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
