Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

dwm

dwm.suckless.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 98 posts

Re: dwm

#41

Post by justinsaccount »

racingmars wrote: post #10

I've used dwm as my window manager for a couple years now, after switching from i3, and have never looked back (i3 was fine, but it had a bug that was affecting me too often--I don't even remember what now). For me, the killer feature (aside from tiling vs overlapping) is that on my three monitors, I can switch virtual desktops independently on each monitor. After being able to do this, I don't understand why every w…

> I can keep a set of windows on my right monitor, and flip between virtual desktops on my center monitor without the right monitor changing at all.

If you decide that you want to see two workspaces from your center monitor, can you easily pull up one of them on the right monitor? The only thing I've ever used that lets you do this is xmonad (described in another comment below).

Re: dwm

#42

Post by Naac »

dwm requires you to configure your environment in C, and recompile the project.

>> You don't have to learn Lua/sh/ruby or some weird configuration file format (like X resource files), beside C, to customize it for your needs: you only have to learn C (at least in order to edit the header file).

From a usability perspective, that's pretty awful.

Stick with i3 for a happier time.

Re: dwm

#43

Post by betwixthewires »

I am an avid user of dmenu, it is absolutely fantastic, there's nothing as easy as pressing a key (or two) and then typing what I'm trying to launch, with autocompletion as well. I know a lot of DEs are incorporating a launch box in the menu directly, and I like the double utility but usually these menus are just too busy. A simple menu like the good ol gnome 2 days with a text box would be perfect, but alas this does not really exist, its either all or nothing.

DWM though, having to compile it every time you want to change the configuration is too much.

Re: dwm

#44

Post by jbmny »

I've been using dwm for years. Oddly enough, I almost always keep it in monocle mode (one window at a time that takes up the entire screen). I rarely find myself wanting to look at two or more windows at once. More often, tmux seems the more appropriate place to split windows. Monocle mode also seems to help me stay focused.

Of course, when I do really need multiple windows, tiling mode is an Alt-t away.

I enjoy using a simple program to meet my simple needs.

Re: dwm

#45

Post by smegsicle »

LargoLasskhyfv wrote: post #40
skulk wrote: post #4

The zen of dwm is endlessly browsing this list of patches and eventually adding so many that any new patches cause merge errors that take a long time to untangle: https://dwm.suckless.org/patches/

Isn't that what https://github.com/bakkeby/dwm-flexipatch is made for?

that would make for a fun gentoo ebuild

Re: dwm

#47

Post by actuallyalys »

fouric wrote: post #22

> In contrast to ion, larswm, and wmii [...] dwm has no Lua integration, no 9P support, no shell-based configuration, no remote control, and comes without any additional tools, such as for printing the selection or warping the mouse Holy cow, some of these features seem really useful. I should look at some of those other window managers! > customized through editing its source code Yikes, this is a very bad idea. Thi…

> Suckless tools are developed for the needs (and the benefit) of their own developers, and nobody else. Remember that.

This a key point. I personally would rather work in Lua than C; the Suckless developers feel the opposite way. This is fine, except when the Suckless developers imply that people who make different technical decisions are inferior or ignorant.

Re: dwm

#48

Post by ghostpepper »

stonogo wrote: post #39

The feature everyone overlooks in this window manager is that it presents windows according to the set of selected tags, and tags can be added or removed from windows on the fly (this is the 'd' in 'dwm'). Aside from its predecessor wmii, I have not been able to find another window manager with this functionality, and I really miss it on my Wayland systems. Once you're accustomed to dynamic tagging it's difficult to…

According to this[0] comment there is a wayland equivalent called dwl[1]? Have not tried it myself - latest commit 3 months ago

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29940855 [1] https://github.com/djpohly/dwl

Re: dwm

#49

Post by tedunangst »

fouric wrote: post #22

> In contrast to ion, larswm, and wmii [...] dwm has no Lua integration, no 9P support, no shell-based configuration, no remote control, and comes without any additional tools, such as for printing the selection or warping the mouse Holy cow, some of these features seem really useful. I should look at some of those other window managers! > customized through editing its source code Yikes, this is a very bad idea. Thi…

I have nevertheless been a happy user of the binary openbsd package for more than 10 years.

Re: dwm

#50

Post by Barrin92 »

tomxor wrote: post #36
fouric wrote: post #22

> In contrast to ion, larswm, and wmii [...] dwm has no Lua integration, no 9P support, no shell-based configuration, no remote control, and comes without any additional tools, such as for printing the selection or warping the mouse Holy cow, some of these features seem really useful. I should look at some of those other window managers! > customized through editing its source code Yikes, this is a very bad idea. Thi…

>> Because dwm is customized through editing its source code > Suckless tools are developed for the needs (and the benefit) of their own developers, and nobody else. Remember that. Just to flip this on it's head a bit (because different perspectives are more illuminating than crude dichotomies). One of the underlying principles they use to justify not supporting external configuration, is minimal code. The absence of…

strong disagree because an artificial codebase size limit doesn't make the codebase more accessible, it makes it worse.

Well designed code isn't primarily short, it's readable, modular, extensible and so on. This isn't the case for dwm. Simplest example, to enable extensions in the form of patches you basically have to apply diffs and because everything is just one giant pile of code even applying two entirely unrelated features can break depending on the order of the patch application.

This isn't elitist in the sense of applying best programming standards, it's elitist in the sense of "if you want to join the club you get hazed first"

Post reply on HN