On Mon, Jul 19, 2004 at 06:30:56AM -0600, Matthew Kettlewell wrote:
> > It makes little sense with resizing.  Most applications demand a
> > certain resize step size (e.g. the font width or height).  You can
> > only rarely snap them to adjacent windows without moving them.
> 
> For me it goes hand-in-hand with productivity, a feature that I've
> been looking for  for quite some time.  So for me it makes perfect
> sense.  
> 
> For example, lets say that I ( obviously I'm  doing things different
> from others ) want to have 3 terminal windows for various compiles on
> the same page.  For me, I quite often like to have them stacked
> horizontally one right on top of the other, taking up roughly 1/3 of
> the available screen space (better readablity of output on multiple
> terms that I can resize if I need the whole context).  This task would
> be much easier to accomplish by dragging a window to the bottom (move
> operation) then resizing it to the left and right screens (snapping
> being the key) and then having the other 2 terminals snap to the
> terminal and screens through resize operations.   

Is this the layout you have in mind?

  +----------------------+ <-- screen
  |                      |
  |                      |
  |                      |
  |                      |
  |                      |
  |+--------------------+| <-- compile windows, all with the same
  ||                    ||     size and position
  |+--------------------+|
  +----------------------+

I don't see what SnapAttraction would buy you here.  And in any
case, the same effect can be achieved much easier with Maximize.
For example, I have

  key q tsfw maximize toggle 100 0

Whenever I want to have a window span all the page width, I just
press ctrl-meta-q.  No fiddling with the mouse required.  Or you
could bind it to a decoration button.

  mouse 3 2 n maximize toggle 100 0

I think the real productivity issue is that you're resizing your
windows manually :-)

With 2.5.11 (i.e. the current version with a fix that I have
just committed), also allows the same effect without maximizing:

  resizemove frame 100 keep 0 -0

You may also want to take a look at the "grow" option to Maximize.

> Yes I could create a script that gets called  through a menu op or a
> key binding, but I'm quite know for just shuffling things around, so
> this would never really solve my problems.
> 
> I haven't looked at the code, but it seems to me that the issue of
> resize-stepsize could be methodically handled in a reasonable fashion.
> 
> I was only looking to see if there were any plans on updating this
> feature, not to implement it myself, but now I've gotten a bit
> curious.  You seem to know a bit about this section of code, If you
> could point me to the base files that deal directly with this, I just
> might take a peek and see if I can implement something on my system
> that will work.

fvwm/move_resize.c

Ciao

Dominik ^_^  ^_^

 --
Dominik Vogt, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Attachment: pgphgviS0EWFg.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to