3 ms·
With i3 you don't need a language. The configuration is a simple text file. That is why i3 has been my Tiled Window Manger for 4 years now. > Configuring i3 T
by baldfat 10y ago
With i3 you don't need a language. The configuration is a simple text file. That is why i3 has been my Tiled Window Manger for 4 years now.
> Configuring i3
This is where the real fun begins ;-). Most things are very dependent on your ideal working environment so we can’t make reasonable defaults for them.
While not using a programming language for the configuration, i3 stays quite flexible in regards to the things you usually want your window manager to do.
http://i3wm.org/docs/userguide.html#configuring http://i3wm.org/docs/userguide.html#configuring
- jerf 10y agoA text file, yes, "simple", well, no, I wouldn't say so. It's not i3's fault; I'd say that comes pretty close to exposing the essential complexity without much accidental complexity. (Translating back out of architecture-astronaut-speak, that's pretty high praise.) But there's a lot of essential complexity. If I plot the complexity of a non-Haskell expert's .xmonad file, an i3 file, and just using stock Ubuntu Gnome, .xmonad and i3 end up pretty much next to each other from the perspective of the Gnome user.
- baldfat 10y agoThat is a Strawman Argument. What person wants a tiled window manager and not customize it? They want a keyboard driven ui without the ability to change the defaults (Which are some of the best defaults ever) It is like saying Notepad is simple and Visual Studio Code is complex because it has a plain text json file for customization. They are different tools. For the tool visual studio is much easier then say VIM. So is i3 MUCH easier to configure then XMond and Awesome.