On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 05:52:28PM -0600, Wesley Merkel wrote: > On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 11:23:50PM +0100, Thorsten Wißmann wrote: > > Sounds OK, but this is weird: > > > > > + In the case where > > > + the tag consequence is also specified, if either of the tag or monitor > > > + values do not refer to an actual monitor or tag, hlwm will behave as if that > > > + consequence was not set. > > > > I did not get what you want to say after reading it multiple times. > > Please rephrase that. Do you want to say something like this? > > > > If an invalid monitor description is given, nothing is done. If the > > tag does not exist, then nothing is done. > > I apologize for the confusion, that is a rather strange sentence. I > meant to say something more like this: > > If an invalid monitor description is given, this consequence is > ignored. If the tag does not exist, the tag consequence is ignored. OK, but if I put an invalid tag= consequence, then client->tag will be NULL and monitor->tag will be set there, so it's not completely ignored. So I would drop this sentence: it's normal that anything invalid will be ignored. I merged it as: 368b78b Integrate monitor consequence with switchtag Regards, Thorsten
Attachment:
pgppZMoVJ5zhH.pgp
Description: PGP signature