3 ms·

StumpWM is another one for you lispers out there. Tiling WMs are indeed awesome. However, some applications just don't play nice with them - if you use one of t

by garply 16y ago

StumpWM is another one for you lispers out there. Tiling WMs are indeed awesome. However, some applications just don't play nice with them - if you use one of these apps frequently, you will have problems and probably end up switching to something else (Enlightenment in my case).

keithhanson 16y ago
I'd be interested in knowing what programs you've had trouble with? In Awesome, you can switch your layout to a floating-based one (oddly default without some rc tweaking) and get around most issues these programs face. Or just switch it to a full screen-based layout :) Anywho, figured some examples might give others' a heads up before devoting hours and mind share to trying it out.
- garply 16y ago
  Ah, the ability to switch is a good thing. I had issues with Pidgin, for one.
- yummyfajitas 16y ago
  Java (at least swing) apps behave oddly, by which I mean they show up as grey boxes. According to the xmonad faq, the problem is that Java uses a hardcoded list of wm's (rather than properly responding to wm events) which does not contain xmonad. http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Xmonad/Frequently_asked_questions#Problems_with_Java_applications.2C_Applet_java_console http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Xmonad/Frequently_asked_q... Even with the suggested fix, Java still has some focus issues.
alec 16y ago
There are two things that set StumpWM apart from the others I've tried, like dwm and xmonad. First, you can name desktops. I find this very handy for quickly switching; I don't have to remember that desktop 5 is where my tests are running. Second, there aren't preset tiling algorithms, but rather it works like emacs - split a window horizontally or vertically, and then resize. I find it easier for the limited amount of splitting I do than cycling through layouts.
- gwern 16y ago
  > First, you can name desktops. I find this very handy for quickly switching Xmonad has extensions for naming and renaming workspaces. And I think you over-exaggerate how Stumpwm/ratpoison tiling differs from Xmonad.

by garply 16y ago

keithhanson 16y ago

I'd be interested in knowing what programs you've had trouble with? In Awesome, you can switch your layout to a floating-based one (oddly default without some rc tweaking) and get around most issues these programs face. Or just switch it to a full screen-based layout :) Anywho, figured some examples might give others' a heads up before devoting hours and mind share to trying it out.

garply 16y ago
Ah, the ability to switch is a good thing. I had issues with Pidgin, for one.
yummyfajitas 16y ago
Java (at least swing) apps behave oddly, by which I mean they show up as grey boxes. According to the xmonad faq, the problem is that Java uses a hardcoded list of wm's (rather than properly responding to wm events) which does not contain xmonad. http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Xmonad/Frequently_asked_questions#Problems_with_Java_applications.2C_Applet_java_console http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Xmonad/Frequently_asked_q... Even with the suggested fix, Java still has some focus issues.

alec 16y ago

There are two things that set StumpWM apart from the others I've tried, like dwm and xmonad. First, you can name desktops. I find this very handy for quickly switching; I don't have to remember that desktop 5 is where my tests are running. Second, there aren't preset tiling algorithms, but rather it works like emacs - split a window horizontally or vertically, and then resize. I find it easier for the limited amount of splitting I do than cycling through layouts.

gwern 16y ago
> First, you can name desktops. I find this very handy for quickly switching Xmonad has extensions for naming and renaming workspaces. And I think you over-exaggerate how Stumpwm/ratpoison tiling differs from Xmonad.