difference between maximized and fullscreen?

difference between maximized and fullscreen?

[joakim]

(frame-parameter nil 'fullscreen) returns 'fullboth when the frame is
maximized, and when the frame is full-screen.

How can I determine these separate states independently?

-- 
Joakim Verona

Re: difference between maximized and fullscreen?

[Jan Djärv]

joakim@verona.se skrev:
> (frame-parameter nil 'fullscreen) returns 'fullboth when the frame is
> maximized, and when the frame is full-screen.
> 
> How can I determine these separate states independently?
> 

You can't just yet (well, you can check the window properties). I will add 
support for fullscreen and maximized soonish.

	Jan D.

Re: difference between maximized and fullscreen?

[Jan Djärv]

joakim@verona.se skrev:
> Jan Djärv <jan.h.d@swipnet.se> writes:
> 
>> joakim@verona.se skrev:
>>> (frame-parameter nil 'fullscreen) returns 'fullboth when the frame is
>>> maximized, and when the frame is full-screen.
>>>
>>> How can I determine these separate states independently?
>>>
>> You can't just yet (well, you can check the window properties). I will
>> add support for fullscreen and maximized soonish.
> 
> Ok that would be very nice for my usecase.
> will it be possible to both read and write maximized and fullscreen separately?
> 

Yes, that is the idea.

	Jan D.

Re: difference between maximized and fullscreen?

[Jan Djärv]

Hi.

I have added maximized now, please test it to see if it does what you need.

Thanks,

	Jan D.

Re: difference between maximized and fullscreen?

[John Yates]

On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 5:39 AM, Jan Djärv<jan.h.d@swipnet.se> wrote:

> You can't just yet (well, you can check the window properties). I will add
> support for fullscreen and maximized soonish.

Jan,

While you are in can you provide a means to add _NET_WM_STATE_STICKY
to _NET_WM_STATE?  I am having no luck adding it to my sole
minibuffer-only frame using x-change-window-property in an
after-make-frame-functions hook, though I am able to change the frame
type and strut properties.

/john

Re: difference between maximized and fullscreen?

[Jan Djärv]

John Yates skrev:
> On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 5:39 AM, Jan Djärv<jan.h.d@swipnet.se> wrote:
> 
>> You can't just yet (well, you can check the window properties). I will add
>> support for fullscreen and maximized soonish.
> 
> Jan,
> 
> While you are in can you provide a means to add _NET_WM_STATE_STICKY
> to _NET_WM_STATE?  I am having no luck adding it to my sole
> minibuffer-only frame using x-change-window-property in an
> after-make-frame-functions hook, though I am able to change the frame
> type and strut properties.
> 

That should be doable, at least it doesn't involve size changes...

	Jan D.

Re: difference between maximized and fullscreen?

[Jan Djärv]

Hello.

I added a frame parameter called sticky.  Please try it.

	Jan D.

John Yates skrev:
> On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 5:39 AM, Jan Djärv<jan.h.d@swipnet.se> wrote:
> 
>> You can't just yet (well, you can check the window properties). I will add
>> support for fullscreen and maximized soonish.
> 
> Jan,
> 
> While you are in can you provide a means to add _NET_WM_STATE_STICKY
> to _NET_WM_STATE?  I am having no luck adding it to my sole
> minibuffer-only frame using x-change-window-property in an
> after-make-frame-functions hook, though I am able to change the frame
> type and strut properties.
> 
> /john
> 

Re: difference between maximized and fullscreen?

[Jan Djärv]

> John Yates skrev:
>> While you are in can you provide a means to add _NET_WM_STATE_STICKY
>> to _NET_WM_STATE?  I am having no luck adding it to my sole
>> minibuffer-only frame using x-change-window-property in an
>> after-make-frame-functions hook, though I am able to change the frame
>> type and strut properties.

BTW, x-change-window-property isn't the right way to change _NET_WM_STATE. 
You must send a client message to the root window, the window manager 
intercepts the message and then changes the property on your window.
See http://standards.freedesktop.org/wm-spec/wm-spec-1.3.html.

x-send-client-message could do the job.

	Jan D.

RE: difference between maximized and fullscreen?

[Drew Adams]

> I added a frame parameter called sticky.  Please try it.

1. I haven't been following this thread. Please ignore if I misunderstand.

Does this mean that the current frame size (and position?) can be "pinned"
(locked), so that frame sizing (and positioning?) functions have no effect
(unless the `sticky' frame parameter is reset to nil)?

That could be interesting. But it might be even better to have a frame-local
variable to control such locking, instead of a frame parameter. That way, a
function could `let'-bind the variable, to inhibit frame movements and resizing
for a given `let' scope (duration). A user could still unconditionally lock a
frame, but would do so by setting the variable instead of a frame parameter.

----

2. We might even have a user option whose value is a list of frame parameters
(not their values) that are to be controlled by this locking. By default, the
list could be just the size and position parameters, but other parameters might
be made susceptible also.

----

3. BTW, I see that the Elisp manual (node Frame-Local Variables) suggests that
frame-local vars are more or less deprecated (since 22.2). Why? The only reason
given is that they "have not proven very useful." The same could be said for
lots of Emacs features that have never been used much. That's hardly been a
sufficient reason to deprecate.

I've never used frame-local variables, myself, but it seems like they could be
useful, as suggested above. `let' binding could be handier than calling
`modify-frame-parameters' explicitly to set and then reset (and perhaps wrapping
with `unwind-protect', to ensure restoration).

Now if there is some additional reason for deprecating - some _problems_ that
arise from having frame-local vars, then that is a different matter. But the
only reason given seems pretty weak: lack of use of a feature is not much of a
reason to remove it. Especially since this feature was introduced only a short
while before it was deprecated (IIUC, it was introduced in Emacs 22.1 and
deprecated in Emacs 22.2?).

Re: difference between maximized and fullscreen?

[Jan Djärv]

Drew Adams skrev:
>> I added a frame parameter called sticky.  Please try it.
> 
> 1. I haven't been following this thread. Please ignore if I misunderstand.
> 
> Does this mean that the current frame size (and position?) can be "pinned"
> (locked), so that frame sizing (and positioning?) functions have no effect
> (unless the `sticky' frame parameter is reset to nil)?

No.  It means that in the presence of multiple virtual desktops, the frame 
will appear in all of them.

	Jan D.

RE: difference between maximized and fullscreen?

[Drew Adams]

=
> >> I added a frame parameter called sticky.  Please try it.
> > 
> > 1. Does this mean that the current frame size (and position?) 
> > can be "pinned" (locked), so that frame sizing (and positioning?)
> > functions have no effect (unless the `sticky' frame parameter
> > is reset to nil)?
> 
> No.  It means that in the presence of multiple virtual 
> desktops, the frame will appear in all of them.

I see. 

FWIW - In that case, perhaps some other name should be used than "sticky",
something that more directly reflects the functionality (of displaying on all
virtual desktops).

Re: difference between maximized and fullscreen?

[tomas]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Wed, Jul 01, 2009 at 04:12:29PM -0700, Drew Adams wrote:

[...]

> > No.  It means that in the presence of multiple virtual 
> > desktops, the frame will appear in all of them.
> 
> I see. 
> 
> FWIW - In that case, perhaps some other name should be used than "sticky",
> something that more directly reflects the functionality (of displaying on all
> virtual desktops).

FWIW[2] that seems to be "standard" window manager jargon (the metaphor
being that the window "sticks" to the glass in your CRT from behind).
Thus it might be unwise to invent something new.

Regards
- -- tomás
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFKTDlIBcgs9XrR2kYRAokuAJ98o2CrCmL8MiyQ3YxlfwQh283oPQCePSLT
itDqdqzu85sgrvydp86CbCM=
=6/jI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: difference between maximized and fullscreen?

[Stephen J. Turnbull]

tomas@tuxteam.de writes:

 > FWIW[2] that seems to be "standard" window manager jargon (the
 > metaphor being that the window "sticks" to the glass in your CRT
 > from behind).  Thus it might be unwise to invent something new.

The use of "sticky window" to describe this feature goes back to at
least 1995 when I started using fvwm.  (I don't claim that fvwm
invented it, it's just the first wm I used that supported this
feature.  I think Windowmaker also supported it, and called it "sticky
window", too.)

Re: difference between maximized and fullscreen?

[Jan Djärv]

Drew Adams skrev:
> =
>>>> I added a frame parameter called sticky.  Please try it.
>>> 1. Does this mean that the current frame size (and position?) 
>>> can be "pinned" (locked), so that frame sizing (and positioning?)
>>> functions have no effect (unless the `sticky' frame parameter
>>> is reset to nil)?
>> No.  It means that in the presence of multiple virtual 
>> desktops, the frame will appear in all of them.
> 
> I see. 
> 
> FWIW - In that case, perhaps some other name should be used than "sticky",
> something that more directly reflects the functionality (of displaying on all
> virtual desktops).

Sticky is what has been used for this for as long as there has been virtual 
desktops AFAIK.  Olvwm used sticky back in 1992. It is even in the desktop 
standards document.  It won't be changed.

	Jan D.