IRCBrowse

2026/02/03

2026-02-03 00:03:21 +0100 <haskellbridge> <g​eekosaur> that's the problem. they'd look even less responsive if double-buffered
2026-02-03 00:03:48 +0100 <haskellbridge> <g​eekosaur> (and let's face it, anything that complex written mostly in JS is going to have sucky responsiveness…)
2026-02-03 00:04:53 +0100 <haskellbridge> <g​eekosaur> (see also: electron apps)
2026-02-03 01:03:33 +0100 <liskin> Actually I specifically preferred Smithay because of Rust.
2026-02-03 01:04:03 +0100 <liskin> But then my idea has always (a couple years) been to have a separate compositor and window manager.
2026-02-03 01:04:39 +0100 <liskin> Compositor in Rust/C, talking to the Haskell window manager over some IPC. Could be Wayland protocol, could be whatever else
2026-02-03 01:05:45 +0100 <liskin> Anyway, geekosaur, do we perhaps have a list of "things people expect from xmonad"? I certainly have an idea of what I expect from it, but I guess other people have very different needs.
2026-02-03 01:06:01 +0100 <liskin> Would be nice to have a wiki page with these "requirements".
2026-02-03 01:08:44 +0100 <liskin> My main motivations for the separation of compositor and wm was: latency (no Haskell garbage collection), and ease of development - being able to restart the wm without losing the session, like you can in X11
2026-02-03 01:10:10 +0100 <liskin> I wonder how people develop their Wayland compositors. I've always worked on the same xmonad that was running my main session. That kind of quick feedback loop is extremely valuable IMO
2026-02-03 01:11:57 +0100 <liskin> (I have some extra bits in place so even if I screw up and it crashes or goes into a loop, I can still recover - like dumping the state to tmpfs every minute and systemd auto-restarts)
2026-02-03 01:13:06 +0100 <liskin> Anyway, bedtime now.
2026-02-03 01:19:29 +0100 <haskellbridge> <g​eekosaur> liskin: someone actually proposed separating them in general and a protocol for doing so. it was soundly thrashed for security reasons iirc
2026-02-03 01:20:15 +0100 <haskellbridge> <g​eekosaur> as to our requirements list, I think the best we'd do is go through the open issues (here and possibly on the old google issues, which is still there but read only) and collect and probably tag them
2026-02-03 01:22:19 +0100 <haskellbridge> <g​eekosaur> I think any such separation for xmonad would require a non-wayland private IPC connection
2026-02-03 02:14:22 +0100Digit(~user@user/digit) (Ping timeout: 246 seconds)
2026-02-03 02:26:50 +0100 <haskellbridge> <T​ranquil Ity> liskin: That makes sense
2026-02-03 02:26:50 +0100 <haskellbridge> If you wanna adapt the reference Smithay compositor for that I can maybe help out, it should serve as a good base despite them wanting to drop it.
2026-02-03 02:27:09 +0100 <haskellbridge> <T​ranquil Ity> liskin: Embedded Wayland window within another Wayland compositor is the usual way
2026-02-03 02:27:23 +0100 <haskellbridge> <T​ranquil Ity> Or a separate VT
2026-02-03 02:27:36 +0100 <haskellbridge> <T​ranquil Ity> At least that's how I did it (both of these)
2026-02-03 02:27:42 +0100 <haskellbridge> <T​ranquil Ity> * do
2026-02-03 02:47:50 +0100Digit(~user@user/digit) Digit
2026-02-03 07:40:38 +0100 <haskellbridge> <d​pn> Tranquil Ity: i haven't thought much about rust <> haskell - but I've mentally always kinda thought traits were somewhat comparable to hs classes :think
2026-02-03 07:40:58 +0100 <haskellbridge> <d​pn> i haven't thought much about rust <> haskell - but I've mentally always kinda thought traits were somewhat comparable to hs classes 🤔
2026-02-03 07:41:00 +0100 <haskellbridge> edit: i have no position of authority on the matter - purely vibe
2026-02-03 07:43:18 +0100ChubaDuba(~ChubaDuba@37.112.231.64) ChubaDuba
2026-02-03 08:02:58 +0100 <geekosaur> there's a few similarities but enough differences that it doesn't make a good mapping
2026-02-03 08:14:47 +0100ft(~ft@p508db4c0.dip0.t-ipconnect.de) (Quit: leaving)
2026-02-03 09:27:11 +0100Enrico63(~Enrico63@148.252.128.12) Enrico63
2026-02-03 10:48:43 +0100ChubaDuba(~ChubaDuba@37.112.231.64) (Quit: WeeChat 4.8.1)
2026-02-03 10:49:01 +0100ChubaDuba(~ChubaDuba@37.112.231.64) ChubaDuba
2026-02-03 10:55:14 +0100ChubaDuba(~ChubaDuba@37.112.231.64) (Quit: WeeChat 4.8.1)
2026-02-03 10:55:33 +0100ChubaDuba(~ChubaDuba@37.112.231.64) ChubaDuba
2026-02-03 11:13:32 +0100ChubaDuba(~ChubaDuba@37.112.231.64) (Quit: WeeChat 4.8.1)
2026-02-03 11:14:08 +0100 <liskin> Security reasons my ass. That's like saying postfix or qmail is less secure than sendmail because they separate functionality into smaller processes.
2026-02-03 11:14:11 +0100ChubaDuba(~ChubaDuba@37.112.231.64) ChubaDuba
2026-02-03 11:14:58 +0100 <liskin> Sure, doing it the same way as X11 would be insecure. Having a privileged wm communicating over a secure channel is fine.
2026-02-03 11:16:20 +0100 <liskin> Speaking of that channel - I considered Wayland protocol because I suspected we might need to send some Wayland data structures from the compositor to the WM, and it might just be easier to do over the same protocol. Unless implementing it on the Haskell side is a major pain in the ass.
2026-02-03 11:17:37 +0100 <liskin> (Note the subtle difference between "protocol" and "channel")
2026-02-03 11:19:27 +0100ChubaDuba(~ChubaDuba@37.112.231.64) (Quit: WeeChat 4.8.1)
2026-02-03 11:20:26 +0100ChubaDuba(~ChubaDuba@37.112.231.64) ChubaDuba
2026-02-03 11:38:43 +0100 <liskin> I think there's also an issue in our tracker where someone's trying to introduce a PureLayout class or something so they can run the layout algorithms as a plugin for some existing Wayland compositor. That's something I'd love to learn more about maybe :-)
2026-02-03 11:46:40 +0100Enrico63(~Enrico63@148.252.128.12) (Quit: Client closed)
2026-02-03 11:56:11 +0100Enrico63(~Enrico63@148.252.128.12) Enrico63
2026-02-03 12:30:31 +0100redgloboli(~redglobol@user/redgloboli) (Quit: ...enter the matrix...)
2026-02-03 12:32:15 +0100redgloboli(~redglobol@user/redgloboli) redgloboli