Subject: Re: tear off menus

From: Dominik Vogt <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 12:58:08 +0100

On Sat, Oct 18, 2003 at 03:05:22PM -0400, Dan Espen wrote:
> Dominik Vogt <[email-masked]> writes:
> > On Wed, Oct 15, 2003 at 09:12:09PM -0400, Dan Espen wrote:
> > > 
> > > Anyone have any ideas about a syntax for disabling button 2 doing
> > > a menu tear off?
> > > 
> > > It doesn't look like we have any comands for controlling button
> > > or key action on menus.
> > > 
> > > It looks like context M (menu) could be used:
> > > 
> > > Mouse 2 M N TearOff
> > > Mouse 2 M N -
> > > 
> > > Key BackSpace M N TearOff
> > > Key BackSpace M N -
> > > 
> > > But that would create a pretty substantial change in the menu code.
> > 
> > Yes - as the menu code is unable to handle normal bindings.  I
> > once made an attempt to make the menu code able to run
> > concurrently to the normal event loop.  In the end I concluded
> > that it's better to dump fvwm and write something new.
> 
> Is something like this too brutal for your tastes:

I think that patch is okay.  We'd have to think more about
overriding the built in key bindings, though.

Ciao

Dominik ^_^  ^_^
--
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]

---

From: Dan Espen <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 13:14:57 -0500

> overriding the built in key bindings, though.

I don't see why we couldn't do the keybindings, but I don't think
anyone is complaining about them.

I'm not too sure about the button 2 default though.  Its too easy
to trigger by accident.  (Which has its good and bad points.)

-- 
Dan Espen                           E-mail: [email-masked]

---

From: Mikhael Goikhman <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 18:53:53 +0000

> anyone is complaining about them.

There are 2 issues here. Global menu bindings and item specific bindings.

Defining configurable menu actions is not trivial, a lot of actions
(actually the whole menu language) should be invented, like go to the
title of the current submenu item, or go to +5 items or to the last item,
or go to the next hot item "r", or unpost, or cancel.

I think it may be done without defining such menu actions initially.
The logic may be: check whether this binding matches the Key definition,
if no, then procede to the hard coded bindings.

But I think users want menu item specific bindings, not global menu
bindings. I.e. define 3 (or more) commands in one item, they will be
executed on different mouse buttons/modifiers. This can't be done without
redesigning the menu, currently only one command is defined per item.

> to trigger by accident.  (Which has its good and bad points.)

I think the problem here is that there is no difference between button
release and click+release. The ultimate configurability would allow to
define an action on either mouse click or click+release or release.
Currently tear off works on either click+release or release of button 2.
For Menu, I would prefer click+release only, but this would disallow
tear off for Popup. I don't know.

Regards,
Mikhael.