On 7/17/06, Thomas Adam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, Jul 17, 2006 at 04:36:08PM +0100, seventh guardian wrote:
> On the other hand, BackColor and ForeColor apply to both situations.
Don't get too attached to those though -- they're deprecated in favour
of using colorsets. :)
> So you can only set a specific icon color if using a colorset, and
> never directly like you do to a window. This is why I believe the
> behaviour is broken.
> I like this aproach. But it would be more clear if was something like:
>
> Style (name=foo |& class=foo) Stick
That's horrible. I really don't want to see any C idioms like that.
:) Most people that use FVWM aren't programmers -- enforcing something
like that on them might make them run away. :)
Lol.. Yes, but how do you specify if its an "and" or an "or"?
Renato
> The comma is a bit ambiguous.. at least for a C programmer ;) I guess
> these two ways of parsing could eventually be merged.
I like the comma because it separates out the different clauses, just
like most other commands are delimited in this way in FVWM. It also
doesn't enforce a prepositional meaning with '&' -- which, unless you're
a programmer, you're not going to necessarily grok at first.
> But this idiom doesn't add anything new, it just organizes the way
> style works. It could be extended in the same way to accept window
> states as an argument:
It does add something new in that the conjunctions are now considered as
one, as opposed to separately, which is how FVWM would currently
interpret them as. Granted it adds no new options to the styles, but
think about how powerful that would be.
> Style (name=foo & winstate=iconic)
That might be a little better, yes. (Again, losing the '&' syntax in
preference of a comma).
I might look into this if I get some time.
-- Thomas Adam
--
"If I were a witch's hat, sitting on her head like a paraffin stove, I'd
fly away and be a bat." -- Incredible String Band.
