Issue 418 in xmonad: Lots of different xmessage invocations
Status: New Owner: ---- New issue 418 by nwfilardo: Lots of different xmessage invocations http://code.google.com/p/xmonad/issues/detail?id=418 Actions.Eval uses safeSpawn "/usr/bin/xmessage" Actions.TopicSpace uses spawnPipe "xmessage -file -" Core uses forkProcess $ executeFile "xmessage" Hooks.DynamicLog uses spawn $ "xmessage Util.EZConfig uses spawn $ "xmessage Util.NamedActions uses xfork $ executeFile "xmessage" Would there be objection to centralizing this (in, say, Operations) and adding a xmessage field to XConfig of type Maybe String? (If Nothing, just write to stderr.) If there's no objection, I'll be happy to write the patch.
Comment #1 on issue 418 by allbery.b: Lots of different xmessage invocations http://code.google.com/p/xmonad/issues/detail?id=418 I've been using a shell script wrapper, but I like this idea. Maybe String is not the way to go, though, as different replacements require different processing; for example, you need to protect HTML entities for zenity. Maybe (String -> X ()) is a better type.
Comment #2 on issue 418 by nwfilardo: Lots of different xmessage invocations http://code.google.com/p/xmonad/issues/detail?id=418 A good point. In fact, the Maybe wrapper can be dropped by using a default ala the other configuration options. I've got a patch in my tree but sadly it's nonorthogonal to the others (darcs' context sensitivity occasionally proves to be just as bad as the MM&G family of DVCSes, sigh). What's the protocol for such things? (Should I attach the patch bundle anyway?)
participants (1)
-
codesite-noreply＠google.com