On Sun, 7 Sep 2008 08:27:40 +0200
"Szabolcs Nagy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 9/7/08, Amit Uttamchandani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Why not include the DWM wiki pages in a "doc/" directory in the source
> > tarball? It wouldn't bump up the size significantly and it would greatly
> > help a
2008/9/6 Brendan MacDonell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I'm not sure I understand the point of this patch. calloc is defined
> in both C89 and C99, and is both fairly generic and very widely used,
> so I fail to see anything safer or more portable about this approach.
> Not to mention that fact that most
On Sat, Sep 06, 2008 at 11:48:05PM -0500, Kurt H Maier wrote:
> Alt+F2 brings up a "run" dialog in xfce.
Yes, but I think this is disabled in the Acer's Linpus Linux. However,
you can use "search for files" (I guess that is using Thunar) to open an
xterm as mentioned.
As for the manpages: I'd ins
On 9/6/08, Filippo Erik Negroni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> A preferable, safer and more portable way of achieving such initialisation
> is to use the compiler's static initialisation.
is it because of null pointer might not be represented as zeros?
the point is good, but i doubt X would run on
On Sun, 7 Sep 2008 11:25:53 +0200
"Szabolcs Nagy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 9/6/08, Filippo Erik Negroni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > A preferable, safer and more portable way of achieving such
> > initialisation is to use the compiler's static initialisation.
>
> is it because of null po
Nicolas Martyanoff wrote:
> On Sun, 7 Sep 2008 11:25:53 +0200
> "Szabolcs Nagy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On 9/6/08, Filippo Erik Negroni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > A preferable, safer and more portable way of achieving such
> > > initialisation is to use the compiler's static initial
On 9/7/08, Nicolas Martyanoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think it's quite explicit: the NULL macro expands to 0.
NULL macro does not necessaryly expands to 0, but this is basic
knowledge look it up in the standard.
what am i concerned about is the internal null pointer representation
(which h
On Sun, Sep 7, 2008 at 5:25 AM, Szabolcs Nagy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> is it because of null pointer might not be represented as zeros?
>
> the point is good, but i doubt X would run on such platform ;)
Unfortunately, the patch uses structure assignment from an unmodified
static variable, so
On 9/7/08, Matthias-Christian Ott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Nicolas Martyanoff wrote:
>
> Does anyone know whether there are architectures where NULL is not equal
> to 0?
this question occasionally appears on comp.lang.c and there exists
such beast, but i cannot find the reference now
probably
On 9/7/08, Brendan MacDonell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 7, 2008 at 5:25 AM, Szabolcs Nagy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> is it because of null pointer might not be represented as zeros?
>>
>> the point is good, but i doubt X would run on such platform ;)
>
> Unfortunately, the patch us
On Sun, 7 Sep 2008 13:53:11 +0200
"Szabolcs Nagy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 9/7/08, Nicolas Martyanoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I think it's quite explicit: the NULL macro expands to 0.
>
> NULL macro does not necessaryly expands to 0, but this is basic
> knowledge look it up in the s
On 9/7/08, Nicolas Martyanoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If NULL expands to 0, then basic logic tells me that the null pointer
> constant is 0; if I'm making a logic error, what is it ?
you expect that the symbol '0' means the same for integers and
pointers, but it's not
(as i wrote earlier: in
On 9/7/08, Matthias-Christian Ott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Does anyone know whether there are architectures where NULL is not equal
> to 0?
see question 1.14:
http://www.lysator.liu.se/c/c-faq/c-1.html#1-14
(last modified in 1994)
On Sun, Sep 7, 2008 at 5:45 AM, Martin Sander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 06, 2008 at 11:48:05PM -0500, Kurt H Maier wrote:
>> Alt+F2 brings up a "run" dialog in xfce.
>
> Yes, but I think this is disabled in the Acer's Linpus Linux.
It works fine.
> As for the manpages: I'd install
Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
> On 9/7/08, Matthias-Christian Ott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Nicolas Martyanoff wrote:
> >
> > Does anyone know whether there are architectures where NULL is not equal
> > to 0?
>
> this question occasionally appears on comp.lang.c and there exists
> such beast, but i ca
If suckless.org is about code quality, memset to zero or calloc are
certainly not a good idea.
Code that sucks less is code that compiles for many years to come, and
strives for maximum portability, within reason.
Setting a NULL pointer to all-zero-bit is IMHO a sign of bad coding.
Whether Anselm w
On Sun, Sep 07, 2008 at 09:24:50PM +0100, Filippo Erik Negroni wrote:
> Code that sucks less is code that compiles for many years to come, and
> strives for maximum portability, within reason.
> Setting a NULL pointer to all-zero-bit is IMHO a sign of bad coding.
> Whether Anselm wants that to go i
Hello,
I've applied a modified version of your patch to my copy of dwm.
I don't quite understand the need to set stack_mode to 'Above' and then
'Below' when reached the selected client (in restack(void)). Actually,
this alone messes with monocle layout (open a floating window and
you'll see the
Hi,
I am using a eeepc 701 for some time now with dwm. As you know the
screen is very small and, when dealing with windows that have
resizehints in tile layout I get some problems. For example, suppose
that I have several (let's say 4 or 5) windows in a tag, and that the
first window of the stack
On Sep 6, 2008, at 1:25 AM, Anselm R Garbe wrote:
2008/9/3 Donald Chai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
I'm sure there might be other problems I created...I don't
understand the
X11 event model at all.
Yes you did. It is important to showhide() before focus and restack
handling. I also slightly change
On Sun, Sep 7, 2008 at 5:06 PM, Tinou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I've applied a modified version of your patch to my copy of dwm.
>
> I don't quite understand the need to set stack_mode to 'Above' and then
> 'Below' when reached the selected client (in restack(void)). Actually,
> thi
21 matches
Mail list logo
