On Mon, 26 Dec 2011 07:44:40 -0000,Michael Witten
I just lost a lot of computation when a long-running program of mine was unceremoniously destroyed by xmonad.
Now, I take almost full responsibility for this mishap, because I *did* in fact instruct xmonad to obliterate my entire X11 session by issuing the keys `mod-shift-q'. However, that instruction was a mistake; I didn't at all have that action in mind when my fingers went for it---and I'm a longtime user who almost never presses that!
A goal of xmonad is to make the user more efficient, but I think this kind of efficiency is not what is intended!
I'm no fan of forcibly hand-holding people, but I think it would be wise at least to show people up front how to configure xmonad to confirm this request (especially if it can be determined that information would be destroyed). Even better, a vanilla xmonad should probably come already configured with such a basic safety mechanism (a power user who doesn't want to be pestered with such trivial second-guessing could disable it).
I had a similar problem in November, and asked in the list for a workaround (confirmation of exit, or four-key combinations). This is the thread http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/xmonad/2011-November/011984.html I am happily using Daniel's solution, after changing the order of "yes\nno\n", to make the default be "no" since I very, very rarely exit xmonad (on purpose). Best, R.
Sincerely, Michael Witten
_______________________________________________ xmonad mailing list xmonad@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/xmonad -- Ramon Diaz-Uriarte Department of Biochemistry, Lab B-25. Facultad de Medicina (UAM) Arzobispo Morcillo, 4 28029 Madrid Spain
Phone: +34-91-497-2412 Email: rdiaz02@gmail.com ramon.diaz@iib.uam.es http://ligarto.org/rdiaz