Subject: todo 3.0 comments

From: Dan Espen <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2002 11:00:43 -0500

I have a question about these:

 18) Split style lists into 5 (resource, class, icon, name, id).
 19) Styles get applied in the above order.
 20) Split each style list into two (one with wildcards, one without).

The current way style commands work is that the last one given takes
precedence.  Won't 20 and possibly 18 and 19 break that?
Won't that be too hard for a user to understand?

On another subject, I'm pretty sure I heard (read|saw) Dominik make some
comment about modules using stdin/stdout instead of the FDs that they
use now.  I guess that would kill off that array of longs being
passed, instead plain text commands could be passed to the module.
Possibly modules could be tested outside Fvwm.  It sounds like
a great idea to me, but it didn't make the todo list.

Maybe it doesn't belong on the todo list, Dominik has said that
the pipes are too slow.  I haven't seen that myself, FvwmAnimate
seems to be very responsive.

On a similar note, theres this:

  6) Change FvwmCommand to use the socket and readline, remove FvwmCommandS.

This is sockets  instead of X properties.   Doesn't  X use  pipes when
$DISPLAY is not a host name (:0.0), for performance reasons?

I think the other 2 choices are shared memory semaphores and dlopen.

Shared memory can be fast (I don't have numbers), but when I configured
XSun to use it, it didn't make any noticeable difference.  I have run
into applications that can't get enough shared memory and I've needed
root access to get past that problem.

I think the dlopen APIs would be as fast as we could get, but I'd
guess they would cause portability problems.

-- 
Dan Espen                               E-mail: [email-masked]
--
Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL:http://www.fvwm.org/>.
To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm-workers" in the
body of a message to [email-masked].
To report problems, send mail to [email-masked]