Arch Linux

whacath

Member

Registered: 2009-05-26

Posts: 283

Ratpoison vs Stumpwm

I am running Ratpoison and I would want to know if there is any reason not to switch to stumpwm. As I understand it Stumpwm is kind of the new Ratpoison.

If I am wrong please explain the difference between them. Please explain why i should stick to Ratpoison or why i should switch to Stumpwm.

Last edited by whacath (2010-07-27 21:46:35)

splittercode

Member

From: WI, USA

Registered: 2010-03-16

Posts: 203

Re: Ratpoison vs Stumpwm

Personally I found StumpWM to be the most confusing wm I've ever tried to set up, I simply gave up.  The StumpWM documentation is fantastic though, so it was only due to my own impatience and unfamiliarity with Lisp.  Ratpoison, on the other hand, was the easiest wm I've ever set up.  I say if you're happy with how ratpoison works, just keep it.  If you're interested in Lisp and like the idea of being able to hack your wm in real time and customize it to the ends of the earth, try StumpWM.  Actually, if you're interested in StumpWM at all, just try it, it can't hurt.

valium97582

Member

Registered: 2010-06-19

Posts: 126

Re: Ratpoison vs Stumpwm

Hmm,  Ratpoison's development is slower than StumpWM's nowadays, but, as slittercode said, if you hate (hate (hate (really really hate))) Common Lisp or if you (hate (profoundly hate (really really hate (hate as you cannot hate anything else)))) hate any Lisp dialect, you should go Ratpoison. Even though you like Lisp dialects and Common Lisp, StumpWM is still more confuse than Ratpoison.

PS: Yep, I am a Lisp guy.

---

I'm also known as zmv on IRC.

patroclo7

Member

From: Bassano del Grappa, ITALY

Registered: 2006-01-11

Posts: 915

Re: Ratpoison vs Stumpwm

I would add that ratpoison is extermely stable, while stumpwm is not in my own experience, being also victim of exoteric compatibility problems with dialects and other lisp misteries.

Last edited by patroclo7 (2010-07-28 15:24:19)

---

Mortuus in anima, curam gero cutis

count-corrupt

Member

From: Germany

Registered: 2009-02-01

Posts: 112

Re: Ratpoison vs Stumpwm

(hate (hate (really really hate))) Common Lisp
(hate (profoundly hate (really really hate (hate as you cannot hate anything else)))) hate any Lisp dialect

schen

Member

Registered: 2009-06-06

Posts: 468

Re: Ratpoison vs Stumpwm

Ratpoison has the advantage of being tried and tested for a while(along with not being crippled by lisp), but stumpwm can be changed while running(along with being written in lisp)

valium97582

Member

Registered: 2010-06-19

Posts: 126

Re: Ratpoison vs Stumpwm

@count-corrupt This is a hidden Common Lisp library. It is called funny-lisp-jokes-with-parenthesis.

---

I'm also known as zmv on IRC.

upsidaisium

Member

From: Vietnam

Registered: 2006-09-16

Posts: 263

Website

Re: Ratpoison vs Stumpwm

The reason to switch or not would be personal preference, I suppose. Just give Stump a try.

I prefer ratpoison because I can very quickly get it working the way I like. And even though I find Lisp interesting.. I don't really want to configure my window manager with it. I'm happy with ratpoison's commands and ratpoisonrc syntax.

---

I've seen young people waste their time reading books about sensitive vampires. It's kinda sad. But you say it's not the end of the world... Well, maybe it is!

count-corrupt

Member

From: Germany

Registered: 2009-02-01

Posts: 112

Re: Ratpoison vs Stumpwm

@count-corrupt This is a hidden Common Lisp library. It is called funny-lisp-jokes-with-parenthesis.

No kidding. When reading that I felt reminded of XKCD's universe-written-in-lisp panels. Awesome humor

splittercode

Member

From: WI, USA

Registered: 2010-03-16

Posts: 203

Re: Ratpoison vs Stumpwm

For what it's worth, I just started learning the basics of Lisp and now I'm pretty comfortable configuring/using Stumpwm.  I'd definitely recommend it more highly than I did in my above post.  I'll just list a few of its unique features I find most useful (compared to ratpoison).

1. Better mouse support (a necessary evil )
2. The mode-line makes it fairly easy to create a customized and useful status bar.
3. Better group support (They act just like the workspaces from other tiling wm's, whereas ratpoison's where confusing to me and more trouble than they were worth.)
4. Ratmenu-like menus(keyboard controlled) for window/group switching are available by default.
5. No xft support (yes, this is a plus)
6. There are many more commands than ratpoison, and coupling that with the fact that stumpwm is configured with an actual Lisp file makes it much more extensible.
7. You can move a window to other frames!  It always annoyed me that you couldn't do this in ratpoison.  (Unless I somehow missed it?)
8. Floating support (it doesn't seem like they've put too much effort into this yet, but it's useable if you require it)
9.  A bunch of little things that would take too much time to list here.

Anyway, I like it.  I will probably stick with it unless I encounter stability problems.

Last edited by splittercode (2010-08-12 20:10:59)

b4283

Member

Registered: 2008-11-26

Posts: 123

Re: Ratpoison vs Stumpwm

I would add that ratpoison is extermely stable, while stumpwm is not in my own experience, being also victim of exoteric compatibility problems with dialects and other lisp misteries.

i'd second this, sbcl has some bugs(?) and if you activate the `ulimit -a` options, it most liekly wouldn't work out of the box.
besides it's not very stable, and is large in binary because it embed the entire sbcl(?) interpreter in itself.

milomouse

Member

Registered: 2009-03-24

Posts: 940

Website

Re: Ratpoison vs Stumpwm

That's the only problem with StumpWM I've ever had. Stability. I agree that Ratpoison is very stable but I still prefer StumpWM. Outside of stability, I've been able to accomplish just about everything I want in a window manager. There's a few "Todos" in my list but it's more knit-picking than anything else. I agree it's worth a try unless you hate lisp (as mentioned above).