Re: [i3] [i3status] Update interval alignment glitch

2014-03-15 Thread Michael Stapelberg
Hi Marco,

Marco Hunsicker i...@hunsicker.de writes:
 I think strategy 3, i.e. refreshing upon SIGUSR1, starting with the
 intervals from there and still aligning to minutes, sounds like the best
 option.

 But it's only a compromise if I understand the intention of the minute 
 aligning correctly.
Why is it a compromise? What is the intention behind the minute
aligning? I thought it’s to have an update at the beginning of every
minute, just as we align on full seconds. This will still be true with
the proposed change. And in case people who use minute alignment don’t
want to have updates during the minute, they should just not send
SIGUSR1 to i3status, right?

-- 
Best regards,
Michael


Re: [i3] [i3status] Update interval alignment glitch

2014-03-15 Thread Michael Stapelberg
Hi Marco,

Marco Hunsicker i...@hunsicker.de writes:
 I'm not sure as no one really explained it. From Gereon's comment 
 regarding ugly numbers my guess is that the alignment should make sure 
 that the refreshes happen in a deterministic way in order to display the 
 time information in a consistent manner.

 05s - 10s- 15s - 20s. You never see 01s 02s 03s 11s etc.
I see.

 This will still be true with
 the proposed change. And in case people who use minute alignment don’t
 want to have updates during the minute, they should just not send
 SIGUSR1 to i3status, right?

 A bit prohibitive to my liking as the signal is very useful and I would 
 rather find a solution that works for all use cases. But then I don't 
I’m not sure why you say that.

No matter what you align on (e.g. 05, 10, 15, as you described), the
signal will always _force_ an update right now. If you don’t want that,
don’t send the signal. The next update after the signal should happen at
the regular interval, i.e. as if the signal was not sent.

 Personally, I'm fine with the patch. But in order to cater for all 
 needs, I would find a new configuration option worth thinking about. 
 This would enable all parties to choose the policy which makes most 
 sense to them. The new default could be to align only once, but users 
 would be able to disable alignment or enforce it always.
I don’t think adding a configuration option for this subtlety is worth
it.

-- 
Best regards,
Michael


Re: [i3] [i3status] Update interval alignment glitch

2014-03-15 Thread Marco Hunsicker

Hello Michael,


A bit prohibitive to my liking as the signal is very useful and I would
rather find a solution that works for all use cases. But then I don't



I’m not sure why you say that.


I was probably too fixated on my needs. You're right with your 
conclusion that someone who prefers the alignment might just want to 
wait a little while for the next automatic refresh.


But there is still the (small) problem of misalignment after startup.



I don’t think adding a configuration option for this subtlety is worth
it.


If you're fine with the provided patch, I certainly am. It's a pity that 
Gereon did not comment any further.


Cheers,
  Marco