[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [RP] what about... (features)

From: Philippe Gendreau
Subject: Re: [RP] what about... (features)
Date: Wed Apr 23 16:37:12 2003
User-agent: Mutt/1.3.28i

> Woudn't you rather find keyboard savvy programs to do you tasks?

Do you mean you could ban the rat permanently and not feel any
differences? I'm am pretty text oriented myself, but I couldn't.
Maybe it would be a good thing, force me to learn the key binding
for those igraphical apps too :)

> Why cascade mouse dependencies from paradigm-busted apps into rp?

What I see as a problem is the fact that when I do use the rat,
it feels buggy if I don't remember which frame is currently
focused. I would rather have the app not responding than partially.
Maybe that's what you should implement, but I'm not sure how that
would work. More precisely, without looking at the code, I can
see that there is two focuses involved: the one following the mouse
and the one following the keyboard.

In most wm they go along. Maybe in rp it should be the keyboard that
wag the rat, I wouldn't mind. But, one of the things I like the rodent
for is it's cutting hability (I usually do the pasting with S+Insert)
and this works very well the way things are. so I think this should
be made configurable, as was proposed by John Meacham. Or the focus
follow the mouse (with two options, sloppy or on click) or the
focus follows the keyboard and make the mouse useless in every other
frame than the current one.

While we are on the subject of features, anybody working on history
in those input window? readline support might do just that and more.

Another feature I can think of for minimal mouse support would be to
be able to paste from X into the input-window of ratpoison. It would
be good in the shell input window too, but this one might be better
off handled by an external program like run-free or similar.

Is there any mouse support in rp? not that I can think of...
If it is the case, maybe it should stay that way cause it's
clean and clearly defined as a limit for it's development.

Maybe that's what you meant by can of worm...

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]