[PATCH] Several style changes

Re: [PATCH] Several style changes

At 1251768452 time_t, Brian Gianforcaro wrote:
> Attached is a patch of several style changes. These changes should bring the
> code closer to being in conformance with the Awesome STYLE document.

Despite this patch being correct, I won't merge it because it changes
code line uselessly. That's just adding noise when using git blame or
other tools like that, and I don't feel like it is worth it.

But anyway, thanks for doing that grunt work. :)

--

-- 
Julien Danjou
// ᐰ <julien <at> danjou.info>   http://julien.danjou.info
// 9A0D 5FD9 EB42 22F6 8974  C95C A462 B51E C2FE E5CD
// Don't give up.

Re: [PATCH + RFC] awful.doc reactivation

Hi koniu,

At 1251749608 time_t, koniu wrote:
> There's a couple of patches for awful.prompt but only the 'font' one
> is related. Other ones are general improvments/fixes.

Thanks for your work!

> There's not much news in terms of functionality (it's been fairly
> complete for months now) and now after a bunch of rebases with plenty
> of edits and squashes the branch and code proposed should be cleanish,
> maybe lacking a bit of comments which I will be happy to provide in
> the near future.

I've a couple of things to add:
- awful.{button,key}: you set description only on ret[1], which seems
  not right, all returned objects should have a description set.
- awful.help require naughty. That's not a bad thing IMHO, but that
  raises again the awful->naughty dependency. We should discuss that.
- I did not tried you branch (I can't right now), but I'm not sure if
  you amended correctly my patch generating documentation. The C API
  documentation is no more auto-generated. Be careful.

> I'm most interested in feedback regarding adding actual descriptions
> to the default rc.lua and awful submodules, and their content. As you
> can see I've added a bunch of descriptions inside awful.widget.* and
> I'm wondering if taglist/tasklist should be handled the same way or
> whether it should be as it is now - inside rc.lua.
> 
> Perhaps this could be a post-merge target, but one nice thing I
> thought of would be automagic description retrieval for
> buttons/keybindings based on the functions that they execute. So
> instead of having to do
> 
>    awful.button({ }, 4, awful.tag.viewnext, nil, "Switch to next tag")
> 
> to set the description in rc.lua, the function trying to display docs
> for that button would check description for awful.tag.viewnext. That
> would make transition from non-described rc.lua to having a keybinding
> cheatsheet much easier. There are a few problems with it however:
> 
> - descriptions taken from luadoc are a bit dirty (eg
> awful.tag.viewnext it's "View next tag. This is the same as
> tag.viewidx(1)" which obviously is a bit too long for a summary of
> bindings. so luadoc for everything would need to be cleaned up a bit
> which seems like a big task.

I'm not sure (i.e. I can't recall) but I wonder if there's not 2 part in
a function documentation in luadoc (a summary and a complete
description). I unfortunately cannot check right now, but you can take a
look by hacking lua-doc-generate.lua to see what type of documentation
is available from luadoc data structure.

OTOH your idea about grabbing the function description rather than
setting one *again* in rc.lua is a good idea IMHO.

I'll try to test your branch ASAP. But do not hesitate to continue working
on it in the meantime. ;)

Btw, you should send me (patch or pull request) the patch totally unrelated
to awful.doc, I'll review and merge. That should split the workload of
rebasing/reviewing. :)

Thanks again koniu.

Cheers,
--

-- 
Julien Danjou
// ᐰ <julien <at> danjou.info>   http://julien.danjou.info
// 9A0D 5FD9 EB42 22F6 8974  C95C A462 B51E C2FE E5CD
// Ferns will rule the world.

[PATCH] prompt fixes/improvements

As suggested, splitting unrelated patches from awful-doc branch -
here's couple of patches to awful.prompt:

0001: is useful eg. if you have a textbox with custom font and then
try to run prompt in it and don't want the font to change to default.
0002: fixes resetting of selectall argument, i wonder if anybody apart
from me uses it.
0003: makes ^w a bit more useful

koniu

Re: [PATCH] prompt fixes/improvements

At 1251807220 time_t, koniu wrote:
> As suggested, splitting unrelated patches from awful-doc branch -
> here's couple of patches to awful.prompt:

All pushed.

Cheers,
--

-- 
Julien Danjou
// ᐰ <julien <at> danjou.info>   http://julien.danjou.info
// 9A0D 5FD9 EB42 22F6 8974  C95C A462 B51E C2FE E5CD
// Don't give up.

[Patch] fix wibox position

Hi people,

the attached one-liner fixes wibox positions bottom and right.
Previously, after creating their position wasn't updated correctly which
resulted in the struts for a wibox being set up correctly but the wibox
always sitting at (0,0).

--

-- 
GCS/IT/M d- s+:- a-- C++ UL+++ US UB++ P+++ L+++ E--- W+ N+ o--
K- w--- ?O M-- ?V PS++ PE- Y++ PGP+++ t+ 5 X+ R tv b+++ DI+++
D+++ G+ e h! r y+

    Gregor Best

Re: [Patch] fix wibox position

Patchy attachy :)

-- 
GCS/IT/M d- s+:- a-- C++ UL+++ US UB++ P+++ L+++ E--- W+ N+ o--
K- w--- ?O M-- ?V PS++ PE- Y++ PGP+++ t+ 5 X+ R tv b+++ DI+++
D+++ G+ e h! r y+

    Gregor Best

From 706377b7714cdba61a1e20b649ebbd793281c6ab Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Gregor Best <gbe <at> intepi.net>
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2009 16:46:15 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] awful.wibox: fix position for right and bottom

Signed-off-by: Gregor Best <gbe <at> intepi.net>
---
 lib/awful/wibox.lua.in |    2 ++
 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/lib/awful/wibox.lua.in b/lib/awful/wibox.lua.in
index f746e63..f633917 100644
--- a/lib/awful/wibox.lua.in
+++ b/lib/awful/wibox.lua.in
 <at>  <at>  -253,6 +253,8  <at>  <at>  function new(arg)
         align(w, arg.align)
     end

+    set_position(w, position)
+
     return w
 end

--

-- 
1.6.4.2

Re: [PATCH] Several style changes

On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 6:49 AM, Julien Danjou <julien <at> danjou.info> wrote:
>
> At 1251768452 time_t, Brian Gianforcaro wrote:
> > Attached is a patch of several style changes. These changes should bring the
> > code closer to being in conformance with the Awesome STYLE document.
>
> Despite this patch being correct, I won't merge it because it changes
> code line uselessly. That's just adding noise when using git blame or
> other tools like that, and I don't feel like it is worth it.
>
> But anyway, thanks for doing that grunt work. :)
>

You might want to add something to the PATCHES or STYLE document,
stating you won't push any patches that contain style only changes.

It would keep someone else from wasting there development time trying
to improve the style of the project.

Thanks,
- Brian Gianforcaro

--

-- 
To unsubscribe, send mail to awesome-devel-unsubscribe <at> naquadah.org.

[awesome bugs] #602 - separate theme loading & execution

THIS IS AN AUTOMATED MESSAGE, DO NOT REPLY.

The following task has a new comment added:

FS#602 - separate theme loading & execution
User who did this - M. Dietrich (emdete)

----------
as i described: reuse given code while tampering with given themes is possible. 

if you currently want to use a theme but want for example to have a different wallpaper you have to copy the
theme or the beautiful-code. 

copying is aweful ;) maybe i misunderstand the aweful-design completly and if i look around i see
screenshots that make me think someone is using a completly rewritten rc.lua for that (i did not find the
lua for garoths stuff like here: http://garoth.com/awesome/garoth-theme.png, dont know if there is a
method to reuse mosst of the given stuff to accomplish that).

so is it common to copy the lua scripts that come with awesome and adjust those for the needs or is a use of most
of the given scripts wanted?
----------

More information can be found at the following URL:
http://awesome.naquadah.org/bugs/index.php?do=details&task_id=602#comment1377

You are receiving this message because you have requested it from the Flyspray bugtracking system.  If you
did not expect this message or don't want to receive mails in future, you can change your notification
settings at the URL shown above.

--

-- 
To unsubscribe, send mail to awesome-devel-unsubscribe <at> naquadah.org.

Re: [PATCH + RFC] awful.doc reactivation

On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 13:05, Julien Danjou<julien <at> danjou.info> wrote:
> I've a couple of things to add:
> - awful.{button,key}: you set description only on ret[1], which seems
>  not right, all returned objects should have a description set.

Ha, yes, I don't like this either - it's a hack.

It allows avoiding duplicates in the keybinding cheat-sheet. The
function retrieves root.keys() and client.focus.keys() and displays
those. There we don't care about Caps + Mod4 + x being lua prompt
along Mod4 + x.

Alternative solution is to catch these duplicates in
awful.help.format.kb_list(), perhaps under condition that the
modifiers might be different but keysym is the same + the
doc.description is the same. This would add yet another loop to
format.kb_list() which is already pretty loaded, which is why I chose
this shortcut. I could try hack up duplicate detection tho.

> - awful.help require naughty. That's not a bad thing IMHO, but that
>  raises again the awful->naughty dependency. We should discuss that.

My initial plan was to clearly split help generation into "frontend"
and "backend" where everything is returned in some standard manner and
then you can display it in naughty or just get a string or whatever.
Eventually my awful.help functions ended up in having a load of pango
markup so I just left naughty as a dependency. Having used it for more
than 3 months now I have to say that I've experienced no ill-effects
to that.

What's your view?

> - I did not tried you branch (I can't right now), but I'm not sure if
>  you amended correctly my patch generating documentation. The C API
>  documentation is no more auto-generated. Be careful.

As mentioned on irc, I'm working on that atm.

>> thought of would be automagic description retrieval for
>> buttons/keybindings based on the functions that they execute. So
>> instead of having to do

> I'm not sure (i.e. I can't recall) but I wonder if there's not 2 part in
> a function documentation in luadoc (a summary and a complete
> description). I unfortunately cannot check right now, but you can take a
> look by hacking lua-doc-generate.lua to see what type of documentation
> is available from luadoc data structure.

This is something I'm gonna be looking into. Also luadoc is pretty
flexible and you can have any fields you want so perhaps we could look
into closer integration.

> Btw, you should send me (patch or pull request) the patch totally unrelated
> to awful.doc, I'll review and merge. That should split the workload of
> rebasing/reviewing. :)

Done and merged - thanks.

cheers,
k

--

-- 
To unsubscribe, send mail to awesome-devel-unsubscribe <at> naquadah.org.