Re: [RP] the end to all resize-loop problems

[Shawn]

Jonathan Walther <address@hidden> writes:

> On Thu, Jan 24, 2002 at 07:12:19PM -0800, Shawn wrote:
> >Actually, we would still need the "special case" handling for
> >transient windows because they ARE a special case. If we didn't
> >recognize them, then the first time ratpoison maximized them, they
> >would take up the whole screen.
> 
> Good point. I stand corrected.
> 
> >Its not my problem if someone else's software is junk. It IS my
> >problem if ratpoison busts, though. A program might behave abnormally
> 
> So you need to build in a resize-loop detector.  You have to store every
> windows last two resize requests, and if they are the same, kill it?

Ryan and I thought about this for a while. There doesn't seem to be
any way to reliably detect it that isn't hacky. You'd have to store
the last 2 plus a time stamp since it could issue 1 at time, t, then
after the user frobbed the program it could issue another one at time,
t+x. There's no reliable way to destinguish it. The ICCCM explicitly
says programs should not try to resize themselves after the WM lays
down the law:

,----
| The response of the client to being resized should be to accept the
| size it has been given and to do its best with it. Clients must not
| respond to being resized by attempting to resize themselves to a
| better size. If the size is impossible to work with, clients are free
| to request to change to the Iconic state.
`----

I don't want to put hacky heuristics to detect infinite resize
looping. Its not the responsibility if Junk Software X sucks. Software
that resizes itself infinitely obviously don't share the philosophy of
ratpoison and should be avoided lest one becomes corrupted.