3 ms·
I use bspwm, which has a very simple design and follows the unix philosophy quite nicely. A single daemon process which manages windows, and all configuration i
by sparkie 13y ago
I use bspwm, which has a very simple design and follows the unix philosophy quite nicely. A single daemon process which manages windows, and all configuration is done with the shell via the `bspc` command, which talks to the daemon over a socket. A separate daemon (sxhkd) is used for keybindings, and the configuration for sxhkd is just a map of keybindings (including mouse buttons) to shell commands, with a very simple DSL to allow groups of commands, and the use of the cursor position. Example from my configuration:
alt + {Left,Down,Up,Right,h,j,k,l}
bspc window --focus {left,down,up,right,left,down,up,right}
{alt,super} + Tab
bspc {window,monitor} --focus next
alt + super + {Left,Down,Up,Right}
bspc window --swap {left,down,up,right}
super + {Left,Down,Up,Right}
bspc window --edge {left,down,up,right} push
super + shift + {Left,Down,Up,Right}
bspc window --edge {right,up,down,left} pull
super + q
bspc window --kill
Worth noting that bspwm treats monitors individually when using window commands, so you need a separate set to handle windows on diff monitors (unless using Xinerama).
I've no idea whether it works on OSX though. 2bwm seems to be popular among OSX users, but I've not tried it.
- jkscm 13y agowow, the tiling concept looks even more flexible than the tiling in xmonad. I will definitely try this.
- sparkie 13y agoI wouldn't say it's more flexible, as XMonad has all the power of Haskell behind it (+ ability to create sub layouts), and is easier to create more complicated arrangements than hacking together a bunch of bash scripts - but I think it's a good balance of flexibility:simplicity. XMonad is pretty complicated to configure even pretty basic things.