Re: [STUMP] A stumpwm's module

[Diogo F. S. Ramos]

Max Mikhanosha <address@hidden> writes:

>> Unfortunately, by doing all this, I couldn't directly access a function
>> called `bar', which is not exported by stumpwm, so I had to use `::'. It
>> looks like a good symbol to export to me.
>
> stumpwm export list is IMHO stale, and its impossible to extend it
> well without using internal symbols, so I see absolutely no problem with that.

Hum, that's unfortunate.

I think that a nice set of exported symbols would be nice. Of course,
it's much easier said than done.

>> Also, because the procedure `define-key' only accepts commands, to make
>> the life of the user easier, I decided to define three of them. To do
>> it, I had to use `(in-package #:stumpwm)' inside my package. I don't
>> know if this is OK or not.
>
> Same as above, OK in my book, but I'm just a user like you not a
> maintainer :-)

My rationale for this decision was that, even if defining a command
clutters stumpwm namespace, this is not a big issue as the "module"
intention is to extend stumpwm.

Maybe it's more like a post rationalization than nothing else.

> For whatever its worth, I had the same hack for over a year, rather
> then go all lispy I thrown together a zsh script.. IMHO it is
> extremely useful to have an "input" parameter that chooses input based
> on name. This way I have bound super-W and super-R to control amarok
> volume, s-S and s-F to control master volume, and s-X and s-V to
> control Alsa volume, which is what firefox/chrome uses.
>
> My script is attached, example usage:
>
> pavol master +1
> pavol Amarok -5
> pavol ALSA +5

That's an interesting idea.

I've never done it and to be honest the only time I think about changing
the volume of a particular source is when I think the total volume is
lower than what I expected.

Thank you for your code. :^)

-- 
Diogo F. S. Ramos