https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=424434
--- Comment #8 from php4...@gmail.com --- > But so far it seems we would just be creating > overhead and achieving nothing tangible. If making it *possible* for an application to know its window's position while moving creates overhead even for those applications who never take advantage of it, then something in the system is very badly designed and that needs to be fixed. If only those applications who actually "query" for their window position will suffer from the overhead (and if the overhead is not bigger than it needs to be), then it's up to the applications whether or not to use the feature. > If it breaks something that isn't an abuse of windows to begin with we can > change it What is "an abuse"?? You can't just say some use case is an abuse because you hadn't thought of it or because it's useless to you. Any use of windows (or of any other feature) should be assumed to be legitimate unless you can prove the contrary. You should approach it the other way around: if it breaks something (and it does, I have already provided an example, no matter how stupid), then it needs to be changed, *unless* you can prove that every single use case that gets broken, is an abuse. Which means: 1. you need to be able to give a very, very precise definition of what you mean by "an abuse" in the first place 2. you need to be able to argue not only that the particular case that is known to get broken is an abuse, but that ANY possible use case that you may have not thought of yet, is also an "abuse". And yes, that's basically impossible, which is precisely my point: the mere fact that I can make up a use case, no matter how stupid, basically means it has to be supported. There's (almost) no such thing as an "abuse", or a not-good-enough (i.e. "better than Browser Pong") use case. Consider this other use case: A window with a background that acts like....... well, a literal window. That is, a window with a "virtual background" image that is anchored to the screen, and has the size of the entire screen, regardless of the position and size of the window. You move the window, you move the "hole" that lets you see the background. Why would I want that? For the sake of it. Because it's aesthetically pleasing (to someone). That's a good enough reason as far as the OS needs to be concerned. Now, regarding the supposed overhead. EVERY other operating system and every other major desktop environment except for Plasma has this. As far as I know, they don't become sluggish or less responsive when you move windows around. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
