When gap_single_client is set to 'false', no gap is used when only one
client is shown in a tag. Since the max layout only ever shows one
client at a time it makes sense to apply this setting for this layout
regardless of the actual number of clients in that tag.
Additionally, if the 'master_fill_policy' property is set to
'master_width_factor', then use a gap even if there is only one client
visible and 'gap_single_client' is false.
If an error occurs while a layout is being applied, arrange_lock could
get stuck at true, meaning that no more re-arranges will happen, thus
breaking the whole layout machinery.
Such errors could happen because the layout itself produces an error,
but also because a width is too large and c:geometry() throws an error.
Thus, this commit moves all of the actual "apply a layout"-code into a
protected context.
Fixes: https://github.com/awesomeWM/awesome/issues/1853
Signed-off-by: Uli Schlachter <psychon@znc.in>
Just re-arranging on every focus change would cause useless/needless
re-arranges (which have no effect except to waste CPU time). Thus, this
adds a special (undocumented) flag on layouts that makes sure that a
rearrange occurs when the focus changes.
Fixes: https://github.com/awesomeWM/awesome/issues/1799
Signed-off-by: Uli Schlachter <psychon@znc.in>
This commit doesn't add any useful documentation, but adds
previously hidden documentation variables. It can be the basis
of a better layout documentation.
Fix#1246
It does not provide much value. The version number is already known to
ldoc globally in the "description" variable.
Signed-off-by: Uli Schlachter <psychon@znc.in>
Reported on IRC. I am not sure why swap() is not enough, but the
old code removed before the mouse refactor did this, so apparently
it is necessary.
The fix has been reported to work by spyroboy on IRC, thanks!
The requirement to call add_signal() was added to catch typos. However, this
requirement became increasingly annoying with property::<name> signals and e.g.
gears.object allowing arbitrary properties to be changed.
All of this ended up in a single commit because tests/examples fails if I first
let add_signal() emit a deprecation warning.
Signed-off-by: Uli Schlachter <psychon@znc.in>
If a screen is removed while a re-layout is pending, previously this code would
cause errors and problems. Since the screen is gone, there is nothing to arrange
anyway and we can just not do anything.
Signed-off-by: Uli Schlachter <psychon@znc.in>
Any signal on a screen instance is also emitted on the screen class, so the here
can just connect to the screen class.
Signed-off-by: Uli Schlachter <psychon@znc.in>
There seem to be a little race condition (either in my layout code or
elsewhere) when playing with multiple screens. As most properties do
not depend on the tag, there is no point in returning early anyway.
Because all our Lua code can now work with screen objects, most of the uses of
s.index that the previous patches added for reaching this goal can be removed
again.
Signed-off-by: Uli Schlachter <psychon@znc.in>
This commits makes a random selection of modules in awful support screen objects
and accept them as parameters everywhere where a screen index is accepted.
Signed-off-by: Uli Schlachter <psychon@znc.in>
It is necessary to have it beforehand when creating layout objects
for unselected layouts.
In the current layout system, there is no layout object, but to allow
tabs and dynamic tagging features like ion3, layouts cannot be stateless.
This allow layout "arrange" to be called less often and react on
the cause of the change itself rather than it's consequences
(usually, the "focus" signal).
Previously, the layout were re-arranged everytime the focus changed.
Now, with "raised" and "lowered", it require less "arrange".
"swapped" allow smarted layouts. Currently, swapped cause a full
re-arrange. It re-read the "index" list from scratch and create
a "new" layout. With "swapped", incremental layout changes are
possible.
Fixes https://github.com/awesomeWM/awesome/issues/616
This still does `client.focus = c` by default, but allows to customize
it.
This was initially suggested in #194, but by using `request::activate`
instead, which would not be the same. Therefore a new signal is being
used instead.
Helped-by: Samir Benmendil <samir.benmendil@gmail.com>
Emmanuel Lepage Vallee
Jan Larres
Uli Schlachter
Daniel Hahler
Uli Schlachter
Akulen
Daniel Hahler
actionless
Julian Wollrath