In Thu, 8 Jul 2021 10:42:57 +0200 Страхиња Радић <cont...@strahinja.org> wrote:
> On 21/07/08 12:30, Nikita Zlobin wrote: > > Perhaps because user wants :P > [...] > > Writing to window title is primary function of my approach. It > > could be done by main app (best), but this time it's dedicated > > script, designed to run parallel and write to window title, while > > main app displays it content. How can it be more minimal? > [...] > > - Main app, doing it themselves? Better of has. Or find better > > point to add this feature for app, that doesn't support that. > > Catering to user desires is a pitfall which leads to bloated > software. It is easy for the users of suckless software to customize > it, so there's no need to include those customizations in the main > repositories, except maybe as patches. The drawbacks of doing the > opposite outweigh the benefits. People don't serve machines - machines serve people. Reason for bloatness I could mention - uncarefullness in design, coding, patching, searching easiest solution way (workarounds). Adding some features in progress may be impossible due to design limitations. I always understood suckless way to be such, when workarounds are unacceptable, with everything only made as optimal as possible. Otherwise it looks like people suck, machines rule. I already pointed example about uncareful symbols naming in arg(3) interface, implemented by plan9 libc header - this is right case, where design-level development is not complete (sucks). Btw, I could note, that current way of configuration via patching is not perfect (using term "sucking" is unspecific): - patches must be optimized for perception if they are to be checked by all, who just want to build. Perhaps, it's problem of diff viewers - e.g., they may add gaps without reason among all strange decisions about how to visualize diff. - single patch per feature may be not okay for review if one such feature requires multiple different change stages, each deserving separate patch. Well, this time I have no certain idea, which would be sure current suckless paradigm. If I were to add optional feature, then neares to suckless configuration way I know is using env vars: make PARAM=VAL.
