3. Lots of returns in bool me::ApplicationSwitcher::handles. I think it would be easier to understand even as a large sequence of A && B && C &&...
4. Missing const. But is that already a pre-existing problem?
132 + bool handles(MirEvent const& event);
5. Holistically I think we have a potential problem with size and complexity. I mean, how small can you make a minimal shell? If a minimal shell requires this much code then we've made some design mistakes. The two features it has should not require hundreds of lines of code. Again, this is not a new problem introduced by this proposal but it is now most visible. I propose that we limit ourselves to one demo shell for some time while we figure out how to reduce the effort required on the shell side. It would be a bad thing if we imposed this kind of complexity on every new shell. Even if there is only one production shell.
1. Tab key only works as root. Is that expected?
2. Wrong licenses: demo-shell/ application_ switcher. * demo-shell/ demo_shell_ placement_ strategy. *
examples/
examples/
3. Lots of returns in bool me::Application Switcher: :handles. I think it would be easier to understand even as a large sequence of A && B && C &&...
4. Missing const. But is that already a pre-existing problem?
132 + bool handles(MirEvent const& event);
5. Holistically I think we have a potential problem with size and complexity. I mean, how small can you make a minimal shell? If a minimal shell requires this much code then we've made some design mistakes. The two features it has should not require hundreds of lines of code. Again, this is not a new problem introduced by this proposal but it is now most visible. I propose that we limit ourselves to one demo shell for some time while we figure out how to reduce the effort required on the shell side. It would be a bad thing if we imposed this kind of complexity on every new shell. Even if there is only one production shell.