Wayland Window Management Proposal
tmpvar at gmail.com
Fri May 13 13:14:57 PDT 2011
On May 13, 2011, at 4:02 PM, Casey Dahlin wrote:
> On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 03:13:01PM +0200, Michal Suchanek wrote:
>> On 13 May 2011 11:26, Daniel Stone <daniel at fooishbar.org> wrote:
>>> On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 06:22:01PM +0200, Michal Suchanek wrote:
>>>> You can't expect that every single client is high-priority and lag-free.
>>> Run better clients, then? Or stop trying to micro-optimise for the case
>>> of pressing the close button on an unresponsive client?
>> This is not about pressing the close button. It need not have an
>> immediate response and people can accept that, there are workarounds
>> and you close windows only so often.
>> However, window resizes need to be responsive otherwise you introduce
>> lag, possibly to the point that the person moving the mouse has no
>> clue what is going on the moment a window resize is initiated.
> You can always use the "rubber band" style of resize, in which case the window
> only needs to be told about the resize, and respond to it, when the user picks
> a size and drops the corner.
> In fact you can pretty easily do both, where the rubber band appears when the
> window hasn't managed to keep up, so the user still has a visual cue to what
> they are doing.
Agreed, although I've always hated the "rubber band" technique as it makes windows feel fragile. In the slow/unresponsive application case, they probably are fragile.
More information about the wayland-devel