[dev] dwm default bindings
I think the default key bindings for dwm are a unfortunate in some cases. For example, alt-f, a natural choice for *f*loat mode, conflicts with pulling down the File menu in many applications from the keyboard. alt-T similarly conflicts with using the Tools menu in Firefox from the keyboard. I realize that these bindings can be changed. But that requires some work (and knowledge of C) on the part of the user. I'm talking about the choice of the defaults. Perhaps the keys modified by alt should instead be modified by ctrl-alt by default? And similarly, alt-shift -> ctrl-alt-shift? I am going to test this idea by modifying my setup. I'll let you know how it works out. /Don
Re: [dev] dwm default bindings
Personally I use the windows key as my modifier, which I think makes the most sense. However there are keyboards out there that don't have a windows key so I don't know if it would be a good idea to use that as the default. On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 10:30 AM, Donald Allen wrote: > I think the default key bindings for dwm are a unfortunate in some > cases. For example, alt-f, a natural choice for *f*loat mode, > conflicts with pulling down the File menu in many applications from > the keyboard. alt-T similarly conflicts with using the Tools menu in > Firefox from the keyboard. > > I realize that these bindings can be changed. But that requires some > work (and knowledge of C) on the part of the user. I'm talking about > the choice of the defaults. Perhaps the keys modified by alt should > instead be modified by ctrl-alt by default? And similarly, alt-shift > -> ctrl-alt-shift? I am going to test this idea by modifying my setup. > I'll let you know how it works out. > > /Don > >
Re: [dev] dwm default bindings
More modifier keys = more finger torture, I would advise against doing this. -- F.
Re: [dev] dwm default bindings
On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 10:42 AM, Julien Pecqueur (JPEC) wrote: > I think the ctrl+alt combinaison suck : you need two hands for killing a > client... Not so, at least on my IBM keyboards and Thinkpad laptop keyboards. Left pinky and thumb on ctrl and alt, 2nd (pointer) finger on c. > Alt is better (Windows key too). Not all keyboards have the Windows key. If I had such a keyboard, I agree, I'd use that key. > Finally a dwm user should don't use suck - more application wich use the alt > key ! ^^ You mean like Firefox? Thunderbird? Gnumeric? etc.? This would save a lot of power, because the computer would be useless and thus I wouldn't turn it on. > > JPEC > > Donald Allen a écrit : > >>I think the default key bindings for dwm are a unfortunate in some >>cases. For example, alt-f, a natural choice for *f*loat mode, >>conflicts with pulling down the File menu in many applications from >>the keyboard. alt-T similarly conflicts with using the Tools menu in >>Firefox from the keyboard. >> >>I realize that these bindings can be changed. But that requires some >>work (and knowledge of C) on the part of the user. I'm talking about >>the choice of the defaults. Perhaps the keys modified by alt should >>instead be modified by ctrl-alt by default? And similarly, alt-shift >>-> ctrl-alt-shift? I am going to test this idea by modifying my setup. >>I'll let you know how it works out. >> >>/Don >> >
Re: [dev] dwm default bindings
I also bind dwm keys and others to MOD4 and then use xmodmap to swap it with the Alt key. I rarely use the Alt key and find using the key on either side of the space bar easily accessible with my thumbs. -steve On 10:33 Wed 22 Jul, Niki Yoshiuchi wrote: >Personally I use the windows key as my modifier, which I think makes the >most sense. However there are keyboards out there that don't have a windows >key so I don't know if it would be a good idea to use that as the default. > >On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 10:30 AM, Donald Allen wrote: > >> I think the default key bindings for dwm are a unfortunate in some >> cases. For example, alt-f, a natural choice for *f*loat mode, >> conflicts with pulling down the File menu in many applications from >> the keyboard. alt-T similarly conflicts with using the Tools menu in >> Firefox from the keyboard. >> >> I realize that these bindings can be changed. But that requires some >> work (and knowledge of C) on the part of the user. I'm talking about >> the choice of the defaults. Perhaps the keys modified by alt should >> instead be modified by ctrl-alt by default? And similarly, alt-shift >> -> ctrl-alt-shift? I am going to test this idea by modifying my setup. >> I'll let you know how it works out. >> >> /Don >> >>
Re: [dev] dwm default bindings
On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 11:13 AM, Donald Allen wrote: > On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 10:42 AM, Julien Pecqueur > (JPEC) wrote: >> I think the ctrl+alt combinaison suck : you need two hands for killing a >> client... > > Not so, at least on my IBM keyboards and Thinkpad laptop keyboards. > Left pinky and thumb on ctrl and alt, 2nd (pointer) finger on c. Oops -- forgot 4th finger on shift. This is not difficult for me, but I am a pianist, so might not work well for others. > >> Alt is better (Windows key too). > > Not all keyboards have the Windows key. If I had such a keyboard, I > agree, I'd use that key. > >> Finally a dwm user should don't use suck - more application wich use the alt >> key ! ^^ > > You mean like Firefox? Thunderbird? Gnumeric? etc.? This would save a > lot of power, because the computer would be useless and thus I > wouldn't turn it on. > > >> >> JPEC >> >> Donald Allen a écrit : >> >>>I think the default key bindings for dwm are a unfortunate in some >>>cases. For example, alt-f, a natural choice for *f*loat mode, >>>conflicts with pulling down the File menu in many applications from >>>the keyboard. alt-T similarly conflicts with using the Tools menu in >>>Firefox from the keyboard. >>> >>>I realize that these bindings can be changed. But that requires some >>>work (and knowledge of C) on the part of the user. I'm talking about >>>the choice of the defaults. Perhaps the keys modified by alt should >>>instead be modified by ctrl-alt by default? And similarly, alt-shift >>>-> ctrl-alt-shift? I am going to test this idea by modifying my setup. >>>I'll let you know how it works out. >>> >>>/Don >>> >> >
Re: [dev] dwm default bindings
I work on a wide variety of platforms and keyboards and I find the windows key prevalent enough to have it as my MODKEY. I even have the menu key wired to dmenu in xbindkeys for conveniance. However I do have dmenu and a few other commands I find indesposable setup to use Shift|Mod1 when I am on older thinkpads or keyboards without Super. I am usually not on the platform long enough to warrant a full conversion. Additionally, the programs you mention tend to have shortcuts in combination with Control, and I use those rather than digging through menus. The only real grump I have when it comes to dwm is lack of state manipulation or information display, like awesome or musca. Which would allow me to use different xbindkey configs dependant on the peripheral's capabilities. -- stadik.net On Jul 22, 2009 8:20 AM, "Donald Allen" wrote: On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 11:13 AM, Donald Allen wrote: > On Wed, Jul 22, 2009... Oops -- forgot 4th finger on shift. This is not difficult for me, but I am a pianist, so might not work well for others. > >> Alt is better (Windows key too). > > Not all keyboards have the Windows key. If I had such a k...
Re: [dev] dwm default bindings
Donald Allen wrote: I think the default key bindings for dwm are a unfortunate in some cases. For example, alt-f, a natural choice for *f*loat mode, conflicts with pulling down the File menu in many applications from the keyboard. alt-T similarly conflicts with using the Tools menu in Firefox from the keyboard. I _never_ use alt-f or alt-t, i just setup monocle and tiled layouts rotated with meta-space. I would probably prefer not to use those keybindings by default. Maybe control+meta+space to toggle floating layout would be enought and then meta+space to go back rotating between monocle and tiled. I realize that these bindings can be changed. But that requires some work (and knowledge of C) on the part of the user. I'm talking about the choice of the defaults. Perhaps the keys modified by alt should instead be modified by ctrl-alt by default? And similarly, alt-shift -> ctrl-alt-shift? I am going to test this idea by modifying my setup. I'll let you know how it works out. /Don
Re: [dev] dwm default bindings
* Donald Allen [2009-07-22 17:13]: > On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 10:42 AM, Julien Pecqueur > > Finally a dwm user should don't use suck - more application wich use the > > alt key ! ^^ > > You mean like Firefox? Thunderbird? Gnumeric? etc.? This would save a > lot of power, because the computer would be useless and thus I > wouldn't turn it on. Well, defaults of certain application are intended to be reasonable for its target group only. OT: BTW, I have launched firefox precisely *once* for the last 2 weeks, since I got uzbl compiled. And uzbl doesn't use alt-f... :o) -- cheers stanio_
Re: [dev] dwm default bindings
On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 11:36 AM, Scytrin dai Kinthra wrote: > I work on a wide variety of platforms and keyboards and I find the windows > key prevalent enough to have it as my MODKEY. I even have the menu key > wired to dmenu in xbindkeys for conveniance. > However I do have dmenu and a few other commands I find indesposable setup > to use Shift|Mod1 when I am on older thinkpads or keyboards without Super. I > am usually not on the platform long enough to warrant a full conversion. My issue may boil down to using newish Thinkpads mostly on the desktop with old IBM keyboards (in a tray below the desktop, together with a real mouse) and so don't often have access to a keyboard with the Windows key. > Additionally, the programs you mention tend to have shortcuts in combination > with Control, and I use those rather than digging through menus. True, but I don't always remember which have keyboard shortcuts, which don't, and if they do, what they are. The menubar and its alt- shortcuts is visible, so no memory issue. > > The only real grump I have when it comes to dwm is lack of state > manipulation or information display, like awesome or musca. Which would > allow me to use different xbindkey configs dependant on the peripheral's > capabilities. > > -- > stadik.net > > On Jul 22, 2009 8:20 AM, "Donald Allen" wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 11:13 AM, Donald Allen > wrote: > On Wed, Jul 22, 2009... > > Oops -- forgot 4th finger on shift. This is not difficult for me, but > I am a pianist, so might not work well for others. > >> >> Alt is better (Windows key too). > > Not all keyboards have the Windows >> >> key. If I had such a k...
Re: [dev] dwm default bindings
Julien Pecqueur (JPEC) dixit (2009-07-22, 16:42): > Finally a dwm user should don't use suck - more application wich use > the alt key ! ^^ Like readline(3)? For that reason alone, it's pretty hopeless to use alt as the wm modifier. I'm in the MOD4 (winkey on pc keyboards) team, too. It doesn't interfere with applications and you're free to bind any wm-related stuff just to that key. -- [a]
Re: [dev] dwm default bindings
On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 11:19 AM, Donald Allen wrote: > On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 11:13 AM, Donald Allen wrote: >> On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 10:42 AM, Julien Pecqueur >> (JPEC) wrote: >>> I think the ctrl+alt combinaison suck : you need two hands for killing a >>> client... >> >> Not so, at least on my IBM keyboards and Thinkpad laptop keyboards. >> Left pinky and thumb on ctrl and alt, 2nd (pointer) finger on c. > > Oops -- forgot 4th finger on shift. This is not difficult for me, but > I am a pianist, so might not work well for others. Still pursuing the alt -> alt-shift idea for my Window-key-less keyboards, I note that my original proposal to also change the alt-shift sequences to control-alt-shift doesn't make sense, since I'm not aware of any conflicts with those. So the objection that killing a client window would require two hands certainly is not an issue, since it would not change from the present default. /Don > >> >>> Alt is better (Windows key too). >> >> Not all keyboards have the Windows key. If I had such a keyboard, I >> agree, I'd use that key. >> >>> Finally a dwm user should don't use suck - more application wich use the >>> alt key ! ^^ >> >> You mean like Firefox? Thunderbird? Gnumeric? etc.? This would save a >> lot of power, because the computer would be useless and thus I >> wouldn't turn it on. >> >> >>> >>> JPEC >>> >>> Donald Allen a écrit : >>> I think the default key bindings for dwm are a unfortunate in some cases. For example, alt-f, a natural choice for *f*loat mode, conflicts with pulling down the File menu in many applications from the keyboard. alt-T similarly conflicts with using the Tools menu in Firefox from the keyboard. I realize that these bindings can be changed. But that requires some work (and knowledge of C) on the part of the user. I'm talking about the choice of the defaults. Perhaps the keys modified by alt should instead be modified by ctrl-alt by default? And similarly, alt-shift -> ctrl-alt-shift? I am going to test this idea by modifying my setup. I'll let you know how it works out. /Don >>> >> >
Re: [dev] dwm default bindings
Donald Allen wrote: > I realize that these bindings can be changed. But that requires some > work (and knowledge of C) on the part of the user. I'm talking about > the choice of the defaults. Perhaps the keys modified by alt should > instead be modified by ctrl-alt by default? And similarly, alt-shift > -> ctrl-alt-shift? I am going to test this idea by modifying my setup. > I'll let you know how it works out. ctrl-alt, alt-shift, ctrl-shift non-english speaking people usually use those keys for layout change, win-key is perfect solution, but not all keyboards have those. there is no default keys to satisfy even majority, i think, so why bother, if majority will have to edit those keys anyway.
Re: [dev] dwm default bindings
On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 3:25 PM, Michael wrote: > Donald Allen wrote: >> I realize that these bindings can be changed. But that requires some >> work (and knowledge of C) on the part of the user. I'm talking about >> the choice of the defaults. Perhaps the keys modified by alt should >> instead be modified by ctrl-alt by default? And similarly, alt-shift >> -> ctrl-alt-shift? I am going to test this idea by modifying my setup. >> I'll let you know how it works out. > > ctrl-alt, alt-shift, ctrl-shift non-english speaking people usually use > those keys for layout change, win-key is perfect solution, but not all > keyboards have those. > there is no default keys to satisfy even majority, i think, so why > bother, if majority will have to edit those keys anyway. I don't buy that argument. Why not pick the set of defaults that satisfies the largest minority? I've changed my own setup to just map the alt- bindings to ctrl-alt-. The alt- bindings remain the same, as do the alt-shift- bindings. The ones I've changed are rarely used, at least by me, and remove the conflicts with things I *do* use, such as alt-f in Firefox, Thunderbird, and anything else with a File menu. So it's a pretty minimal change that's better for me. /Don > >
Re: [dev] dwm default bindings
On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 05:22:22PM -0400, Donald Allen wrote: > On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 3:25 PM, Michael wrote: > > Donald Allen wrote: > >> I realize that these bindings can be changed. But that requires some > >> work (and knowledge of C) on the part of the user. I'm talking about > >> the choice of the defaults. Perhaps the keys modified by alt should > >> instead be modified by ctrl-alt by default? And similarly, alt-shift > >> -> ctrl-alt-shift? I am going to test this idea by modifying my setup. > >> I'll let you know how it works out. > > > > ctrl-alt, alt-shift, ctrl-shift non-english speaking people usually use > > those keys for layout change, win-key is perfect solution, but not all > > keyboards have those. > > there is no default keys to satisfy even majority, i think, so why > > bother, if majority will have to edit those keys anyway. > > I don't buy that argument. Why not pick the set of defaults that > satisfies the largest minority? > > I've changed my own setup to just map the alt- bindings > to ctrl-alt-. The alt- bindings remain the same, > as do the alt-shift- bindings. The ones I've changed are > rarely used, at least by me, and remove the conflicts with things I > *do* use, such as alt-f in Firefox, Thunderbird, and anything else > with a File menu. So it's a pretty minimal change that's better for > me. > > /Don > > > > > > > Or why not just keep the same defaults that have been there for years?
Re: [dev] dwm default bindings
On Jul 22, 2009, at 2:22 PM, Donald Allen wrote: On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 3:25 PM, Michael wrote: Donald Allen wrote: I realize that these bindings can be changed. But that requires some work (and knowledge of C) on the part of the user. I'm talking about the choice of the defaults. Perhaps the keys modified by alt should instead be modified by ctrl-alt by default? And similarly, alt-shift -> ctrl-alt-shift? I am going to test this idea by modifying my setup. I'll let you know how it works out. ctrl-alt, alt-shift, ctrl-shift non-english speaking people usually use those keys for layout change, win-key is perfect solution, but not all keyboards have those. there is no default keys to satisfy even majority, i think, so why bother, if majority will have to edit those keys anyway. I don't buy that argument. Why not pick the set of defaults that satisfies the largest minority? It *is* the set of defaults that satisfies the majority. I think many people change the setting to Mod2Mask to use the Windows key, but the current default of Mod1Mask will work out of the box for anyone who doesn't have a Windows/Apple/diamond key. If the only modifier keys on your keyboard are CTRL and ALT, I suggest mapping one ALT key to Mod1 and the other to Mod2. I've noticed that I rarely use the modifier keys on the right-hand side anyway...
Re: [dev] dwm default bindings
On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 7:23 PM, Donald Chai wrote: > On Jul 22, 2009, at 2:22 PM, Donald Allen wrote: > >> On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 3:25 PM, Michael wrote: >>> >>> Donald Allen wrote: I realize that these bindings can be changed. But that requires some work (and knowledge of C) on the part of the user. I'm talking about the choice of the defaults. Perhaps the keys modified by alt should instead be modified by ctrl-alt by default? And similarly, alt-shift -> ctrl-alt-shift? I am going to test this idea by modifying my setup. I'll let you know how it works out. >>> >>> ctrl-alt, alt-shift, ctrl-shift non-english speaking people usually use >>> those keys for layout change, win-key is perfect solution, but not all >>> keyboards have those. >>> there is no default keys to satisfy even majority, i think, so why >>> bother, if majority will have to edit those keys anyway. >> >> I don't buy that argument. Why not pick the set of defaults that >> satisfies the largest minority? > > It *is* the set of defaults that satisfies the majority. You are responding to something I didn't say. Read again. I think many > people change the setting to Mod2Mask to use the Windows key, but the > current default of Mod1Mask will work out of the box for anyone who doesn't > have a Windows/Apple/diamond key. That's true. But it also conflicts with a widely-available UI convention, alt-based keyboard accelerators. And there are other possible defaults that use only ctrl and alt that don't exhibit this conflict. > > If the only modifier keys on your keyboard are CTRL and ALT, I suggest > mapping one ALT key to Mod1 and the other to Mod2. I've noticed that I > rarely use the modifier keys on the right-hand side anyway... Good idea. > >
Re: [dev] dwm default bindings
On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 08:07:42PM -0400, Donald Allen wrote: > On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 7:23 PM, Donald Chai wrote: > > On Jul 22, 2009, at 2:22 PM, Donald Allen wrote: > > > >> On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 3:25 PM, Michael wrote: > >>> > >>> Donald Allen wrote: > > I realize that these bindings can be changed. But that requires some > work (and knowledge of C) on the part of the user. I'm talking about > the choice of the defaults. Perhaps the keys modified by alt should > instead be modified by ctrl-alt by default? And similarly, alt-shift > -> ctrl-alt-shift? I am going to test this idea by modifying my setup. > I'll let you know how it works out. > >>> > >>> ctrl-alt, alt-shift, ctrl-shift non-english speaking people usually use > >>> those keys for layout change, win-key is perfect solution, but not all > >>> keyboards have those. > >>> there is no default keys to satisfy even majority, i think, so why > >>> bother, if majority will have to edit those keys anyway. > >> > >> I don't buy that argument. Why not pick the set of defaults that > >> satisfies the largest minority? > > > > It *is* the set of defaults that satisfies the majority. > > You are responding to something I didn't say. Read again. > > I think many > > people change the setting to Mod2Mask to use the Windows key, but the > > current default of Mod1Mask will work out of the box for anyone who doesn't > > have a Windows/Apple/diamond key. > > That's true. But it also conflicts with a widely-available UI > convention, alt-based keyboard accelerators. And there are other > possible defaults that use only ctrl and alt that don't exhibit this > conflict. > at the risk of being patronising, why not just buy a cheap keyboard for 10euro/usd or whatever? surely it can not be that difficult to find an old and cheap keyboard for your machine which does not have the extra key on your current keyboard? > > > > If the only modifier keys on your keyboard are CTRL and ALT, I suggest > > mapping one ALT key to Mod1 and the other to Mod2. I've noticed that I > > rarely use the modifier keys on the right-hand side anyway... > > Good idea. > > > > > > -- Jimmy Tang Trinity Centre for High Performance Computing, Lloyd Building, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin 2, Ireland. http://www.tchpc.tcd.ie/ | http://www.tchpc.tcd.ie/~jtang pgpUAWc8SLtDU.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [dev] dwm default bindings
On (22/07/09 10:30), Donald Allen wrote: > Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2009 10:30:34 -0400 > From: Donald Allen > To: dev mail list > Subject: [dev] dwm default bindings > List-Id: dev mail list > > I think the default key bindings for dwm are a unfortunate in some > cases. For example, alt-f, a natural choice for *f*loat mode, > conflicts with pulling down the File menu in many applications from > the keyboard. alt-T similarly conflicts with using the Tools menu in > Firefox from the keyboard. > > I realize that these bindings can be changed. But that requires some > work (and knowledge of C) on the part of the user. I'm talking about > the choice of the defaults. Perhaps the keys modified by alt should > instead be modified by ctrl-alt by default? And similarly, alt-shift > -> ctrl-alt-shift? I am going to test this idea by modifying my setup. > I'll let you know how it works out. > > /Don > I personally tend to use winkey (aka Mod4), which is otherwise almost unused key, so it's really suited for this. -Ph -- Premysl "Anydot" Hruby, http://www.redrum.cz/ - I'm a signature virus. Please add me to your signature and help me spread!
Re: [dev] dwm default bindings
Donald Allen dixit (2009-07-22, 20:07): > > people change the setting to Mod2Mask to use the Windows key, but the > > current default of Mod1Mask will work out of the box for anyone who doesn't > > have a Windows/Apple/diamond key. > > That's true. But it also conflicts with a widely-available UI > convention, alt-based keyboard accelerators. And there are other > possible defaults that use only ctrl and alt that don't exhibit this > conflict. > > > > > If the only modifier keys on your keyboard are CTRL and ALT, I suggest > > mapping one ALT key to Mod1 and the other to Mod2. I've noticed that I > > rarely use the modifier keys on the right-hand side anyway... > > Good idea. Unless you happen to belong to the 95% (or so) of world population that doesn't use an US keyboard-layout and often needs altgr for entering diacritics and such. -- [a]
Re: [dev] dwm default bindings
2009/7/22 Donald Allen : > I think the default key bindings for dwm are a unfortunate in some > cases. For example, alt-f, a natural choice for *f*loat mode, > conflicts with pulling down the File menu in many applications from > the keyboard. alt-T similarly conflicts with using the Tools menu in > Firefox from the keyboard. > > I realize that these bindings can be changed. But that requires some > work (and knowledge of C) on the part of the user. I'm talking about > the choice of the defaults. Perhaps the keys modified by alt should > instead be modified by ctrl-alt by default? And similarly, alt-shift > -> ctrl-alt-shift? I am going to test this idea by modifying my setup. > I'll let you know how it works out. We got config.h for that. The default key bindings won't change ;) Kind regards, Anselm
Re: [dev] dwm default bindings
On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 4:18 AM, Jimmy Tang wrote: > On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 08:07:42PM -0400, Donald Allen wrote: >> On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 7:23 PM, Donald Chai wrote: >> > On Jul 22, 2009, at 2:22 PM, Donald Allen wrote: >> > >> >> On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 3:25 PM, Michael wrote: >> >>> >> >>> Donald Allen wrote: >> >> I realize that these bindings can be changed. But that requires some >> work (and knowledge of C) on the part of the user. I'm talking about >> the choice of the defaults. Perhaps the keys modified by alt should >> instead be modified by ctrl-alt by default? And similarly, alt-shift >> -> ctrl-alt-shift? I am going to test this idea by modifying my setup. >> I'll let you know how it works out. >> >>> >> >>> ctrl-alt, alt-shift, ctrl-shift non-english speaking people usually use >> >>> those keys for layout change, win-key is perfect solution, but not all >> >>> keyboards have those. >> >>> there is no default keys to satisfy even majority, i think, so why >> >>> bother, if majority will have to edit those keys anyway. >> >> >> >> I don't buy that argument. Why not pick the set of defaults that >> >> satisfies the largest minority? >> > >> > It *is* the set of defaults that satisfies the majority. >> >> You are responding to something I didn't say. Read again. >> >> I think many >> > people change the setting to Mod2Mask to use the Windows key, but the >> > current default of Mod1Mask will work out of the box for anyone who doesn't >> > have a Windows/Apple/diamond key. >> >> That's true. But it also conflicts with a widely-available UI >> convention, alt-based keyboard accelerators. And there are other >> possible defaults that use only ctrl and alt that don't exhibit this >> conflict. >> > > at the risk of being patronising, why not just buy a cheap keyboard for > 10euro/usd or whatever? surely it can not be that difficult to find an > old and cheap keyboard for your machine which does not have the extra > key on your current keyboard? Presumably you meant "does" above, instead of "does not"? You need to check your keyboard :-) Kidding aside, I'm a fast typist, spend a lot of time at the computer and I care a lot about the feel of my keyboard. I have never found anything that was as satisfactory (and I've tried) as IBM's classic keyboards, of which I have two. They don't have the Windows key, so I have to deal with this problem with the pair of ctrl and alt keys. I have made a change, described in a previous message, that works well for me. /Don > >> > >> > If the only modifier keys on your keyboard are CTRL and ALT, I suggest >> > mapping one ALT key to Mod1 and the other to Mod2. I've noticed that I >> > rarely use the modifier keys on the right-hand side anyway... >> >> Good idea. >> >> > >> > >> > > -- > Jimmy Tang > Trinity Centre for High Performance Computing, > Lloyd Building, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin 2, Ireland. > http://www.tchpc.tcd.ie/ | http://www.tchpc.tcd.ie/~jtang >
Re: [dev] dwm default bindings
On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 5:13 AM, Anselm R Garbe wrote: > 2009/7/22 Donald Allen : >> I think the default key bindings for dwm are a unfortunate in some >> cases. For example, alt-f, a natural choice for *f*loat mode, >> conflicts with pulling down the File menu in many applications from >> the keyboard. alt-T similarly conflicts with using the Tools menu in >> Firefox from the keyboard. >> >> I realize that these bindings can be changed. But that requires some >> work (and knowledge of C) on the part of the user. I'm talking about >> the choice of the defaults. Perhaps the keys modified by alt should >> instead be modified by ctrl-alt by default? And similarly, alt-shift >> -> ctrl-alt-shift? I am going to test this idea by modifying my setup. >> I'll let you know how it works out. > > We got config.h for that. The default key bindings won't change ;) As I observed when I began this thread, your defaults conflict directly with a well-established UI convention of many applications (the underline convention indicating invoking a menu or button with alt+the underlined letter; this convention dates from years before dwm was even a gleam in your eye). I'm frankly surprised that you would have done this in the first place, and then compound it by refusing to fix it, when (in my opinion) a reasonable fix exists (change alt- to ctrl-alt-), even for keyboards without the Windows key. I am *not* trying to be argumentative here. I think you've done a superb piece of work that I'm now using every day. But releasing a window manager with defaults that interfere with a well-established UI convention that spans many applications makes no sense to me, especially when the rest of the work is so good. What you do is obviously up to you, and I've fixed the problem for myself (so the defaults don't affect me personally), but I think the current defaults are a mistake and so I offer these final thoughts on the matter. /Don > > Kind regards, > Anselm > >
Re: [dev] dwm default bindings
2009/7/23 Donald Allen :
> On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 5:13 AM, Anselm R Garbe wrote:
>> We got config.h for that. The default key bindings won't change ;)
>
> As I observed when I began this thread, your defaults conflict
> directly with a well-established UI convention of many applications
> (the underline convention indicating invoking a menu or button with
> alt+the underlined letter; this convention dates from years before dwm
> was even a gleam in your eye). I'm frankly surprised that you would
Btw this Alt+& convention came from the WIMP paradigm, dwm is
anti-WIMP (because it manages the windows for you).
My/our convention so far is, that a frequently used action should be
bound to key bindings that are easy to access. I understand that
Mod1-{b,t,f,m} are less frequent actions, and I'd be open to change
them into Mod1-Control-{b,t,f,m}, I've no strong feelings about such a
change...
> have done this in the first place, and then compound it by refusing to
> fix it, when (in my opinion) a reasonable fix exists (change
> alt- to ctrl-alt-), even for keyboards
> without the Windows key.
See above.
Kind regards,
Anselm
Re: [dev] dwm default bindings
On 7/23/09, Donald Allen wrote: > fix it, when (in my opinion) a reasonable fix exists (change > alt- to ctrl-alt-), even for keyboards > without the Windows key. editing ctrl-alt out from the default config is more work than just changing the mod key definition > window manager with defaults that interfere with a well-established UI > convention that spans many applications makes no sense to me, the ctrl-alt is better in that sense but still not very usable anyway, i could agree with the change if it's just #define MODKEY Mod1Mask|ControlMask what would you use for toggleview and toggletag?
Re: [dev] dwm default bindings
On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 8:19 AM, Szabolcs Nagy wrote: > On 7/23/09, Donald Allen wrote: >> fix it, when (in my opinion) a reasonable fix exists (change >> alt- to ctrl-alt-), even for keyboards >> without the Windows key. > > editing ctrl-alt out from the default config is more work than just > changing the mod key definition > >> window manager with defaults that interfere with a well-established UI >> convention that spans many applications makes no sense to me, > > the ctrl-alt is better in that sense but still not very usable > > anyway, i could agree with the change if it's just > #define MODKEY Mod1Mask|ControlMask I believe this would have the effect of changing alt- to ctrl-alt- and also alt-shift- to ctrl-alt-shift-, yes? If so, that makes sense to me. It preserves the current consistency, which my fix does not, so in that way it is less confusing, at the expense of making the oft-used alt- gestures somewhat more awkward to type. But it accomplishes the primary goal of getting the defaults out of the way of the application UI gestures. And, has been discussed to death here, many with Windows keys will alter their configurations to use them. > > what would you use for toggleview and toggletag? I'd just keep them consistent with the change you described above, so they'd just have ctrl added to what they are currently. /Don > >
Re: [dev] dwm default bindings
On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 11:27 AM, Donald Allen wrote: > > > I believe this would have the effect of changing alt- to > ctrl-alt- and also alt-shift- to > ctrl-alt-shift-, yes? > > If so, that makes sense to me. It preserves the current consistency, > which my fix does not, so in that way it is less confusing, at the > expense of making the oft-used alt- gestures somewhat more > awkward to type. But it accomplishes the primary goal of getting the > defaults out of the way of the application UI gestures. And, has been > discussed to death here, many with Windows keys will alter their > configurations to use them. > > > > > what would you use for toggleview and toggletag? > > I'd just keep them consistent with the change you described above, so > they'd just have ctrl added to what they are currently. > > /Don > > > > > > > If you are proposing that we change the defaults, the most sensible option is to change it to the windows key (mod4, not sure what that is on an Apple keyboard). 99% of keyboards out there have the MOD4 key, it seems that most of the people taking part in this discussion use it, and people who don't have an mod4 key can change the default configuration. Using ctrl-alt is cumbersome and I imagine that most dwm users would end up changing it (and thus making it at least as bad as alt).
Re: [dev] dwm default bindings
> > anyway, i could agree with the change if it's just > > #define MODKEY Mod1Mask|ControlMask imho the best default is Mod1 - it's a lot less annoying than Ctrl+Alt, in apps Esc+key can often be used instead. Ctrl+Alt is not a good default, because it'll induce EMACS-fingers and scare off the userbase. The only reason for Mod4 not being the default is that it might not work out of the box for everyone - although it's still an option for people who don't actually have a Windows key, they can remap Caps-Lock or somesuch to Mod4 using xmodmap. Regards, Mate
Re: [dev] dwm default bindings
On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 11:27 AM, Donald Allen wrote: > On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 8:19 AM, Szabolcs Nagy wrote: >> On 7/23/09, Donald Allen wrote: >>> fix it, when (in my opinion) a reasonable fix exists (change >>> alt- to ctrl-alt-), even for keyboards >>> without the Windows key. >> >> editing ctrl-alt out from the default config is more work than just >> changing the mod key definition >> >>> window manager with defaults that interfere with a well-established UI >>> convention that spans many applications makes no sense to me, >> >> the ctrl-alt is better in that sense but still not very usable >> >> anyway, i could agree with the change if it's just >> #define MODKEY Mod1Mask|ControlMask > > I believe this would have the effect of changing alt- to > ctrl-alt- and also alt-shift- to > ctrl-alt-shift-, yes? > > If so, that makes sense to me. It preserves the current consistency, > which my fix does not, so in that way it is less confusing, at the > expense of making the oft-used alt- gestures somewhat more > awkward to type. But it accomplishes the primary goal of getting the > defaults out of the way of the application UI gestures. And, has been > discussed to death here, many with Windows keys will alter their > configurations to use them. > >> >> what would you use for toggleview and toggletag? > > I'd just keep them consistent with the change you described above, so > they'd just have ctrl added to what they are currently. I just checked out the original config.h and I see the problem now -- they *already* use ctrl. Let me think about it ... /Don > > /Don > >> >> >
Re: [dev] dwm default bindings
On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 11:44 AM, Donald Allen wrote: > On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 11:27 AM, Donald Allen wrote: >> On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 8:19 AM, Szabolcs Nagy wrote: >>> On 7/23/09, Donald Allen wrote: fix it, when (in my opinion) a reasonable fix exists (change alt- to ctrl-alt-), even for keyboards without the Windows key. >>> >>> editing ctrl-alt out from the default config is more work than just >>> changing the mod key definition >>> window manager with defaults that interfere with a well-established UI convention that spans many applications makes no sense to me, >>> >>> the ctrl-alt is better in that sense but still not very usable >>> >>> anyway, i could agree with the change if it's just >>> #define MODKEY Mod1Mask|ControlMask >> >> I believe this would have the effect of changing alt- to >> ctrl-alt- and also alt-shift- to >> ctrl-alt-shift-, yes? >> >> If so, that makes sense to me. It preserves the current consistency, >> which my fix does not, so in that way it is less confusing, at the >> expense of making the oft-used alt- gestures somewhat more >> awkward to type. But it accomplishes the primary goal of getting the >> defaults out of the way of the application UI gestures. And, has been >> discussed to death here, many with Windows keys will alter their >> configurations to use them. >> >>> >>> what would you use for toggleview and toggletag? >> >> I'd just keep them consistent with the change you described above, so >> they'd just have ctrl added to what they are currently. > > I just checked out the original config.h and I see the problem now -- > they *already* use ctrl. Let me think about it ... As an experiment, testing an alternative to the change I'd already made, I am using xmodmap to map alt_r to mod3, and have changed the MODKEY definition in config.h to #define MODKEY Mod3Mask So now every use of alt in dwm expects the right alt key instead of the left, freeing up the left for use with applications. While this sort-of works, it's not satisfactory. The problem is with the alt-shift commands. You cannot press alt_r and shift simultaneously, and certainly not shift, then alt_r. You have to press alt_r first, then shift. I think this is a problem with the x server. At least, I found some discussion about problems of this kind, one identical to this (discussed in 2004!) and there was talk of a fix. Perhaps they broke it again. But unless I'm doing something wrong, use of alt_r appears not to be viable, at least not at the moment. /Don > > /Don > >> >> /Don >> >>> >>> >> >
Re: [dev] dwm default bindings
On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 8:19 AM, Szabolcs Nagy wrote: > On 7/23/09, Donald Allen wrote: >> fix it, when (in my opinion) a reasonable fix exists (change >> alt- to ctrl-alt-), even for keyboards >> without the Windows key. > > editing ctrl-alt out from the default config is more work than just > changing the mod key definition > >> window manager with defaults that interfere with a well-established UI >> convention that spans many applications makes no sense to me, > > the ctrl-alt is better in that sense but still not very usable > > anyway, i could agree with the change if it's just > #define MODKEY Mod1Mask|ControlMask > > what would you use for toggleview and toggletag? I tried this, adding LockMask to toggleview and toggletag. It does not work as expected. I brought up a clean dwm (5.6) and started an xterm (ctrl-alt-shift-enter). From the xterm, I started a (background) gnucash. I then tried to move the gnucash to tag 9 with ctrl-alt-shift-9. This moved both the gnucash and the xterm. I then backed out my changes and tried this again, and just the gnucash moved, as expected. Nothing I've tried has been satisfactory, or worked correctly, or both. I don't think the problems are dwm's; I'm guessing this is X breakage (such as the issue with Alt_R needing to be pushed first; I'm running OpenBSD 4.5 and I think the X server is one version behind what's currently available). So, I've given up, gone to the basement where some more recent keyboards than the two old IBM keyboards I've been using were rotting, and put them back into service, the point being that they have Windows keys. I changed the MODKEY definition to Mod4Mask, rebuilt and installed, and I'm done messing with this. Consider it a compliment to the quality of dwm that I'm willing to give up my nice old keyboards for this newer stuff (I'm typing on a Microsoft keyboard at the moment; not too bad, and perhaps the ergonomic design will preserve my aging wrists) in order be able to continue using it. /Don > >
