[xmonad] The future of PerWorkspace

[Andrea Rossato]

On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 01:42:32PM -0600, Spencer Janssen wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 07:29:58PM -0500, Brent Yorgey wrote:
> >   1. PerWorkspace is an inelegant hack with several icky problems:
> 
> Agreed.  It is approaching the limits of xmonad's layout design.

actually I don't think this is true. I believe that the LayoutClass
can be far more expressive that it is now just by adding a couple of
trivial methods. I've sent a patch two messages ago. That kind of
approach seems to me to be cleaner that yours (which, as far as I get
it requires messages going around to know where you are).

> Oh, and once we've done this, description will not need to be in the X monad.
> Andrea, did you have any other use cases in mind?

I don't think I can "prove" you need a description in the X monad to
have class level composition, but I've surely sent a case: a
CombinedLayout instance where a combined description could not be
implemented purely without information loss. I take that as a prove.
But if you can implement that combinator over the layout class with
your approach, then I think you proved I'm wrong.

As I said, I feel my approach (some additional methods) is cleaner
probably because I'm just used to it. I'll study yours, but I find it
uselessly complicated.

Cheers,
Andrea