Re: Window configurations

[martin rudalics]

>> Users "define" window configurations by splitting and deleting windows.
>> They have no idea of the underlying window tree.
>
> I'm not sure that's right.  While users certainly don't know about
> `frame-root-window' windows, the tree is otherwise readily apparent
> (since, for instance, resizing or deleting a window distinguishes
>
> +-+-+     +-+-+
> |A|B|     |A|B|
> +-|-+ and +---+
> |C|D|     |C|D|
> +-+-+     +-+-+
>
> in an immediately obvious fashion).

Yes.  But by merey looking at these configuration you can't tell the
difference.

> Why not store a configuration as a
> (resolution-independent) tree:
>
> subtree = window | tree ;
> tree = "(", horiz, subtree, split, { split }, ")" ;
> split = fraction, subtree ;
> horiz = nil | t ;            (* t for C-x 3 *)
> fraction = ? float ? ;
> window = ? ... ? ;           (* the hard part *)

That's more or less what I proposed earlier: All I need for the current,
tiling window-manager based on window-trees is the type of the split
(horizontal or vertical) and the fraction occupied by a window wrt to
its parent window.  This implies, however, that an overlapping manager
processing such a structure must be able to understand window trees.

martin