EZConfig changes for Util.NamedActions
Hello To allow Util.NamedActions to be used with EZConfig, I had to generalize some type signatures in EZConfig and add an additional function. What do you think of these changes, should I go ahead and apply them? Thanks, Adam
On Sun, May 03, 2009 at 10:54:09PM -0400, vogt.adam@gmail.com wrote:
Hello
To allow Util.NamedActions to be used with EZConfig, I had to generalize some type signatures in EZConfig and add an additional function.
What do you think of these changes, should I go ahead and apply them?
I didn't work on the actual substantial part of EZConfig; that was byorgey. That said, it looks fine, though the duplication between mkNamedSubmaps and mkSubmaps makes me squeamish. Also, why not have mkNamedKeymap take HasName instead of NamedAction? I didn't look at the NamedActions module in great detail. Looks neat! Suggestions for UI: - An IO () -> IO () that wraps the main xmonad action and wrests control from it if the user asks for --keys. - An X () that toggles a cute little overlay like the ? window for gmail and reader. Devin -- When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. LEARN CHINESE - In the future jian lai 將來 Lucky Numbers 11, 32, 26, 48, 33, 54
On Sun, May 03, 2009 at 10:54:09PM -0400, vogt.adam@gmail.com wrote:
Hello
To allow Util.NamedActions to be used with EZConfig, I had to generalize some type signatures in EZConfig and add an additional function.
What do you think of these changes, should I go ahead and apply them?
Thanks, Adam
No particular comments about this patch. However, I think the approach in http://code.haskell.org/~sjanssen/xmonad-newconfig is more promising and will be the core eventually. It may be better to invest effort in getting xmonad 1.0 ready and released? Cheers, Spencer Janssen
Excerpts from Spencer Janssen's message of Mon May 04 20:14:42 +0200 2009:
On Sun, May 03, 2009 at 10:54:09PM -0400, vogt.adam@gmail.com wrote:
Hello
To allow Util.NamedActions to be used with EZConfig, I had to generalize some type signatures in EZConfig and add an additional function.
What do you think of these changes, should I go ahead and apply them?
Thanks, Adam
No particular comments about this patch. However, I think the approach in
Is this branch already usable? Does XMC have to be updated? What are the missing points that prevents from merging this to core? -- Nicolas Pouillard
participants (4)
-
Devin Mullins -
Nicolas Pouillard -
Spencer Janssen -
vogt.adam＠gmail.com