Re: [dev] hotkey (1) - a suckless global keybinder
Although taking a different approach (conf file parsed at start-up, additional features), the sxhkd/shkd might be of interest. The former is for X and the latter for the console. The two have compatible configuration files formats. https://github.com/baskerville/sxhkd https://github.com/baskerville/shkd or https://github.com/patrickhaller/speckeysd Kurt
Re: [dev] hotkey (1) - a suckless global keybinder
I added hotkey config file support. It is so ugly, and requires much more code. I am ashamed of it to be honest, but it works. except when it segfaults if your config isn't written pefectly. i'm working on that. On 11 February 2014 06:07, Kurt Van Dijck dev.k...@vandijck-laurijssen.be wrote: Although taking a different approach (conf file parsed at start-up, additional features), the sxhkd/shkd might be of interest. The former is for X and the latter for the console. The two have compatible configuration files formats. https://github.com/baskerville/sxhkd https://github.com/baskerville/shkd or https://github.com/patrickhaller/speckeysd Kurt
Re: [dev] hotkey (1) - a suckless global keybinder
Thank you for this little gem! A humble feature request: add the ability to have modal keybindings / modes as in vim(1), etc… Maybe someone with more experience could combine the superb keymodes patch with this? After hacking the code myself a little I am struck at implementing it myself, as the whole X11/event system seems to be designed to make my brain rot. :) Well, your nice addition to the suckless tools has all in all made my day, so thx again! cheers, mih On 2/9/14, Calvin Morrison mutanttur...@gmail.com wrote: This is great! I was just having a discussion about someone for a non-x11 keyboard binding system! Thanks for the link Calvin Morrison On 9 February 2014 05:32, Raphaël Proust raphla...@gmail.com wrote: Although taking a different approach (conf file parsed at start-up, additional features), the sxhkd/shkd might be of interest. The former is for X and the latter for the console. The two have compatible configuration files formats. https://github.com/baskerville/sxhkd https://github.com/baskerville/shkd Cheers, -- __ Raphaël Proust On Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 11:37 PM, Calvin Morrison mutanttur...@gmail.com wrote: Why wasn't there a simple way to have hotkeys, dealt with properly, in a suckless manner? I don't want inane bindings for every WM, I don't even want my wm controlling my hotkeys! So I wrote it.
Re: [dev] hotkey (1) - a suckless global keybinder
I'm not sure what you mean by modal bindings. Do you mean like executing a hotkey like Ctrl+: to jump the hotkey program, then pressing another key to execute a command? Sorry I'm not sure what you are saying. Calvin On 10 February 2014 17:02, Michael Hauser awarewa...@gmail.com wrote: Thank you for this little gem! A humble feature request: add the ability to have modal keybindings / modes as in vim(1), etc... Maybe someone with more experience could combine the superb keymodes patch with this? After hacking the code myself a little I am struck at implementing it myself, as the whole X11/event system seems to be designed to make my brain rot. :) Well, your nice addition to the suckless tools has all in all made my day, so thx again! cheers, mih On 2/9/14, Calvin Morrison mutanttur...@gmail.com wrote: This is great! I was just having a discussion about someone for a non-x11 keyboard binding system! Thanks for the link Calvin Morrison On 9 February 2014 05:32, Raphaël Proust raphla...@gmail.com wrote: Although taking a different approach (conf file parsed at start-up, additional features), the sxhkd/shkd might be of interest. The former is for X and the latter for the console. The two have compatible configuration files formats. https://github.com/baskerville/sxhkd https://github.com/baskerville/shkd Cheers, -- __ Raphaël Proust On Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 11:37 PM, Calvin Morrison mutanttur...@gmail.com wrote: Why wasn't there a simple way to have hotkeys, dealt with properly, in a suckless manner? I don't want inane bindings for every WM, I don't even want my wm controlling my hotkeys! So I wrote it.
Re: [dev] hotkey (1) - a suckless global keybinder
Calvin Morrison writes: I'm not sure what you mean by modal bindings. Do you mean like executing a hotkey like Ctrl+: to jump the hotkey program, then pressing another key to execute a command? Sorry I'm not sure what you are saying. Calvin Exactly! Use case: one hotkey (in my case: the useless '' key on german keyboards) to activate a, let's call it COMMAND mode :), maybe a litte visual hint (I'm making the taskbar visible in dwm for now), that does nothing else than waiting for the next keypress. Have a look at dwm's keymodes patch, I really like this implementation. My hacked 'hotkey' version depends on some X11/event race condition, as I was able to figure out how to grab the whole kb for a while; but I haven't started to dig into the keymodes patch yet; therefore my suggestion to combine the two. Also the goal is to have a system that can be operaten with literally one finger alone, I think it would be a godsent for accessibility (not just when consuming yp *ducks* :). cheers, mih ps. I really like the poetic license! -- 'aware water' is an anagram for 'we are at war'
Re: [dev] hotkey (1) - a suckless global keybinder
make a hidden window, and set the window focus to it? that'd be my guess. I don't think you can grab two non modifier keys though, and for example probably wouldn't work with the way I am grabbing it. I'd love too see some code. A visual hint could be nice. I definitely see the advantage of a modal system because there are already so many shortcuts you can accidentally interfere with,having just one to interfere with reduces the issue. but then why not just use my program to launch a script with dmenu (vertical version) and have a keybinding for that? eg: ALT+P spawns dmenu dmenu shows 1. mocp -g 2. xterm 3. firefox you press 3 and enter and it executes..? what do you think of that? On 10 February 2014 18:24, Michael Hauser awarewa...@gmail.com wrote: Calvin Morrison writes: I'm not sure what you mean by modal bindings. Do you mean like executing a hotkey like Ctrl+: to jump the hotkey program, then pressing another key to execute a command? Sorry I'm not sure what you are saying. Calvin Exactly! Use case: one hotkey (in my case: the useless '' key on german keyboards) to activate a, let's call it COMMAND mode :), maybe a litte visual hint (I'm making the taskbar visible in dwm for now), that does nothing else than waiting for the next keypress. Have a look at dwm's keymodes patch, I really like this implementation. My hacked 'hotkey' version depends on some X11/event race condition, as I was able to figure out how to grab the whole kb for a while; but I haven't started to dig into the keymodes patch yet; therefore my suggestion to combine the two. Also the goal is to have a system that can be operaten with literally one finger alone, I think it would be a godsent for accessibility (not just when consuming yp *ducks* :). cheers, mih ps. I really like the poetic license! -- 'aware water' is an anagram for 'we are at war'
Re: [dev] hotkey (1) - a suckless global keybinder
On 10 February 2014 18:31, Calvin Morrison mutanttur...@gmail.com wrote: make a hidden window, and set the window focus to it? that'd be my guess. I don't think you can grab two non modifier keys though, and for example probably wouldn't work with the way I am grabbing it. I'd love too see some code. A visual hint could be nice. I definitely see the advantage of a modal system because there are already so many shortcuts you can accidentally interfere with,having just one to interfere with reduces the issue. but then why not just use my program to launch a script with dmenu (vertical version) and have a keybinding for that? eg: ALT+P spawns dmenu dmenu shows 1. mocp -g 2. xterm 3. firefox you press 3 and enter and it executes..? what do you think of that? On 10 February 2014 18:24, Michael Hauser awarewa...@gmail.com wrote: Calvin Morrison writes: I'm not sure what you mean by modal bindings. Do you mean like executing a hotkey like Ctrl+: to jump the hotkey program, then pressing another key to execute a command? Sorry I'm not sure what you are saying. Calvin Exactly! Use case: one hotkey (in my case: the useless '' key on german keyboards) to activate a, let's call it COMMAND mode :), maybe a litte visual hint (I'm making the taskbar visible in dwm for now), that does nothing else than waiting for the next keypress. Have a look at dwm's keymodes patch, I really like this implementation. My hacked 'hotkey' version depends on some X11/event race condition, as I was able to figure out how to grab the whole kb for a while; but I haven't started to dig into the keymodes patch yet; therefore my suggestion to combine the two. Also the goal is to have a system that can be operaten with literally one finger alone, I think it would be a godsent for accessibility (not just when consuming yp *ducks* :). cheers, mih ps. I really like the poetic license! -- 'aware water' is an anagram for 'we are at war' and here it is: $ cat modal.sh list=firefox chromium xterm xterm -e mocp v=0 `for i in $list; do echo $v $i; v=$(($v+1)); done | dmenu -l 5 | sed 's/^[0-9] //g'` now it has some kinks, the whole for i in whatever in bash doesn't work quite properly becaue it works on spaces and newlines... not sure what to do about that. but i am sure there's a bash way to do it.
Re: [dev] hotkey (1) - a suckless global keybinder
Calvin Morrison writes: make a hidden window, and set the window focus to it? that'd be my guess. I don't think you can grab two non modifier keys though, and for example probably wouldn't work with the way I am grabbing it. I'd love too see some code. Yes, I tried to load/unload the grabs as needed in my ugly hack :) A visual hint could be nice. I definitely see the advantage of a modal system because there are already so many shortcuts you can accidentally interfere with,having just one to interfere with reduces the issue. I like this idea, but unfortunately it's beyond my understanding of the X11 system; Though I'd love it, if someone could point me in some proper direction for example/tutorial code. but then why not just use my program to launch a script with dmenu (vertical version) and have a keybinding for that? eg: Simply put: I think this approach is too slow. I dabbled with dmenu and too many keys hit just get lost, while starting up dmenu. ALT+P spawns dmenu dmenu shows 1. mocp -g 2. xterm 3. firefox you press 3 and enter and it executes..? what do you think of that? Muscle memory is really fast, the idea is a good one, but I believe even with prelinking dmenu's libs it wouldn't be as efficient as a standalone utility. cheers, mih ps. sorry about my rusty active english skills :) On 10 February 2014 18:24, Michael Hauser awarewa...@gmail.com wrote: Calvin Morrison writes: I'm not sure what you mean by modal bindings. Do you mean like executing a hotkey like Ctrl+: to jump the hotkey program, then pressing another key to execute a command? Sorry I'm not sure what you are saying. Calvin Exactly! Use case: one hotkey (in my case: the useless '' key on german keyboards) to activate a, let's call it COMMAND mode :), maybe a litte visual hint (I'm making the taskbar visible in dwm for now), that does nothing else than waiting for the next keypress. Have a look at dwm's keymodes patch, I really like this implementation. My hacked 'hotkey' version depends on some X11/event race condition, as I was able to figure out how to grab the whole kb for a while; but I haven't started to dig into the keymodes patch yet; therefore my suggestion to combine the two. Also the goal is to have a system that can be operaten with literally one finger alone, I think it would be a godsent for accessibility (not just when consuming yp *ducks* :). cheers, mih ps. I really like the poetic license! -- 'aware water' is an anagram for 'we are at war' -- 'aware water' is an anagram for 'we are at war'
Re: [dev] hotkey (1) - a suckless global keybinder
Calvin Morrison writes: 8--8-- and here it is: $ cat modal.sh list=firefox chromium xterm xterm -e mocp v=0 `for i in $list; do echo $v $i; v=$(($v+1)); done | dmenu -l 5 | sed 's/^[0-9] //g'` now it has some kinks, the whole for i in whatever in bash doesn't work quite properly becaue it works on spaces and newlines... not sure what to do about that. but i am sure there's a bash way to do it. Yay thx, I have a simillar hack in 'production', that run-or-raises apps, tmux windows, browser tabs, etc… But I really think this should be the job of the one and only minimal keybinding utility. With my dmenu scripts I always have to pause myself to not run into some weired race condition, where dmenu takes it's own time to accept the keys I hit, after dropping them to the active client… also: the additional Enter/Return in dmenu seems unefficient. Generally a great approach, but not in the long term. cheers, mih -- 'aware water' is an anagram for 'we are at war'
Re: [dev] hotkey (1) - a suckless global keybinder
On 2014-02-09 01:43:55 -0500, Calvin Morrison wrote: Surely the user knows what shell they are using? Sure it's a valid point, but almost irrelevant at the same time. Who cares about their shell behavior? If they think it's an issue, then they need not run any commands. I assume people are intelligent, and want to let them use their shells additional features, rather than retard them with safety. Well, I think the fact that you have to append after each command about sums up my feelings on the matter. pgpsvK__oa0LV.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [dev] hotkey (1) - a suckless global keybinder
Calvin Morrison: On 9 February 2014 01:07, Chris Down ch...@chrisdown.name wrote: - You are using system(), which is highly unportable and extremely fragile; I'm not so sure. What's a better solution? http://lubutu.com/code/spawning-in-unix
Re: [dev] hotkey (1) - a suckless global keybinder
Although taking a different approach (conf file parsed at start-up, additional features), the sxhkd/shkd might be of interest. The former is for X and the latter for the console. The two have compatible configuration files formats. https://github.com/baskerville/sxhkd https://github.com/baskerville/shkd Cheers, -- __ Raphaël Proust On Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 11:37 PM, Calvin Morrison mutanttur...@gmail.com wrote: Why wasn't there a simple way to have hotkeys, dealt with properly, in a suckless manner? I don't want inane bindings for every WM, I don't even want my wm controlling my hotkeys! So I wrote it.
Re: [dev] hotkey (1) - a suckless global keybinder
On 09/02/14, Chris Down wrote:
On 2014-02-09 01:43:55 -0500, Calvin Morrison wrote:
Surely the user knows what shell they are using? Sure it's a valid
point, but almost irrelevant at the same time. Who cares about their
shell behavior? If they think it's an issue, then they need not run
any commands. I assume people are intelligent, and want to let them
use their shells additional features, rather than retard them with
safety.
Well, I think the fact that you have to append after each command
about sums up my feelings on the matter.
I suppose it's a question of whether you'll use shell features or not.
If not, you can go with how dwm does it, and pass
(char *[]){ xterm, -e, mail, NULL } to execvp.
Regarding EXIT_SUCCESS, I think this is perhaps a bit picky, 0 is
perfectly fine and besides, every non-trivial shell script hard codes
stdout and stderr: 21.
Rob
Re: [dev] hotkey (1) - a suckless global keybinder
On Sunday 09 February 2014 01:22:00 Calvin Morrison wrote: I h8 licensing schemes which make me read the text... somebody call their lawyer and sue, looks like mit is not 4 me. have a look at the poetic license http://www.genaud.net/2005/10/poetic-license/ ... its cute while still saying everything that is needed.
Re: [dev] hotkey (1) - a suckless global keybinder
On 2014-02-09 14:18:01 +0100, Jens Staal wrote: have a look at the poetic license http://www.genaud.net/2005/10/poetic-license/ ... its cute while still saying everything that is needed. ...and almost certainly not legally tested. pgpb36Q16Si39.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [dev] hotkey (1) - a suckless global keybinder
This is great! I was just having a discussion about someone for a non-x11 keyboard binding system! Thanks for the link Calvin Morrison On 9 February 2014 05:32, Raphaël Proust raphla...@gmail.com wrote: Although taking a different approach (conf file parsed at start-up, additional features), the sxhkd/shkd might be of interest. The former is for X and the latter for the console. The two have compatible configuration files formats. https://github.com/baskerville/sxhkd https://github.com/baskerville/shkd Cheers, -- __ Raphaël Proust On Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 11:37 PM, Calvin Morrison mutanttur...@gmail.com wrote: Why wasn't there a simple way to have hotkeys, dealt with properly, in a suckless manner? I don't want inane bindings for every WM, I don't even want my wm controlling my hotkeys! So I wrote it.
Re: [dev] hotkey (1) - a suckless global keybinder
On 2014-02-08 18:37:19 -0500, Calvin Morrison wrote: I have had a love affair with dwm's config.h. Unfortunately I also love i3, and also deal with a plethora of other desktops on my day to day work. so I created hotkey (1). Why wasn't there a simple way to have hotkeys, dealt with properly, in a suckless manner? I don't want inane bindings for every WM, I don't even want my wm controlling my hotkeys! So I wrote it. A few comments: - What's with the weird inconsistent indentation? It makes your code really hard to read; - You are using system(), which is highly unportable and extremely fragile; - There is no author attribution for the code taken from dwm, which is required; - You also failed to include the license header, which is required by the MIT license; - You are using the unportable return 0 when returning from main() -- use EXIT_SUCCESS instead. I did not look in detail at the code, there may be more issues. pgp0z1QzZO9_H.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [dev] hotkey (1) - a suckless global keybinder
On 9 February 2014 01:07, Chris Down ch...@chrisdown.name wrote: On 2014-02-08 18:37:19 -0500, Calvin Morrison wrote: I have had a love affair with dwm's config.h. Unfortunately I also love i3, and also deal with a plethora of other desktops on my day to day work. so I created hotkey (1). Why wasn't there a simple way to have hotkeys, dealt with properly, in a suckless manner? I don't want inane bindings for every WM, I don't even want my wm controlling my hotkeys! So I wrote it. A few comments: - What's with the weird inconsistent indentation? It makes your code really hard to read; Not sure where you are reading it. My indentation is perfectly normal, tabs mark a single level of indentation. Maybe you have a weird editor setup or something with 16 spaces per tab? - You are using system(), which is highly unportable and extremely fragile; I'm not so sure. What's a better solution? system() seems like a very standard function. Portability is also not a real concern for me. mos everybody uses linux who uses X11, if you are using something else, well, then it's probably simple to write a patch. If there's a better solution I am all for it though - There is no author attribution for the code taken from dwm, which is required; - You also failed to include the license header, which is required by the MIT license; I h8 licensing schemes which make me read the text... somebody call their lawyer and sue, looks like mit is not 4 me. - You are using the unportable return 0 when returning from main() -- use EXIT_SUCCESS instead. good catch. I usually do, though when would it ever reach that point? while(1) loops until the process exists, so maybe removin the line would be even better. I did not look in detail at the code, there may be more issues. please do, I am unfamilar with x11's api so i probably botched it quite a bit.
Re: [dev] hotkey (1) - a suckless global keybinder
On 2014-02-09 01:22:00 -0500, Calvin Morrison wrote: - You are using system(), which is highly unportable and extremely fragile; I'm not so sure. What's a better solution? system() seems like a very standard function. Portability is also not a real concern for me. mos everybody uses linux who uses X11, if you are using something else, well, then it's probably simple to write a patch. If there's a better solution I am all for it though It's not about the function, it's about the fact that it relies on the reparsing of that syntax in your shell, which is unknown. pgpeyVqzloMCK.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [dev] hotkey (1) - a suckless global keybinder
On 9 February 2014 01:36, Chris Down ch...@chrisdown.name wrote: On 2014-02-09 01:22:00 -0500, Calvin Morrison wrote: - You are using system(), which is highly unportable and extremely fragile; I'm not so sure. What's a better solution? system() seems like a very standard function. Portability is also not a real concern for me. mos everybody uses linux who uses X11, if you are using something else, well, then it's probably simple to write a patch. If there's a better solution I am all for it though It's not about the function, it's about the fact that it relies on the reparsing of that syntax in your shell, which is Surely the user knows what shell they are using? Sure it's a valid point, but almost irrelevant at the same time. Who cares about their shell behavior? If they think it's an issue, then they need not run any commands. I assume people are intelligent, and want to let them use their shells additional features, rather than retard them with safety.
