>>953931
>tiling window managers
>Emacs
Why not both? Xah has a good article on why tiling window managers>>953931
>tiling window managers
>Emacs
Why not both?
In all seriousness, Xah has a good article on why tiling window managers suck. Mainly his disdain comes down to two things: the blatantly misguided facade of "window optimization" and obscure window controls.
The former is something you'll never really overcome, just by the inherent nature of window tiling. You'll never be able to center a window, so you'll never have a direct view of anything you're working on unless that's the only window on that particular desktop. Most window managers by default will render windows according to awkward proportions; the irony of tiling wm's saving estate, of course, is that most applications aren't really designed for the window sizes that tiling wm's impose--even as I'm using Emacs right now, my windows are much bigger than the allotted 80-character column that I assign my fill-column var to be at in text buffers (I think my prog-mode buffers are at 140 before whitespace mode bugs me), and even if I exceed that, it's kind of unwieldy. With that in mind, there is an advantage to Emacs with regards to this issue, because Emacs has good window management, better than any multiplexer like tmux and definitely better than most tiling wm's, I would assert–but not by default. Like, for example, in pic related I'm using a module that resizes windows according to the golden ratio. That doesn't address disproportionate sizes or the fact that windows are pushed to the wayside, but it does keep un-highlighted windows in the periphery, which is basically the desired end for most. You could probably (and people probably have) implement this in more extensible wm's like wm, but I don't think the windows resize according to which window is active.
The latter is actually incredibly nixed, at least in the case of Xah, because he's a die-hard Emacs user. What better keybind choices for an Emacs user than that of Emacs itself? Of course, most people don't like the default input paradigm of Emacs, enough to where they dismiss Emacs itself. Well there are a lot of reasons to dismiss Emacs, but it's really sad that they've been so shit on by editors and other software that they sincerely believe keybindings are set in stone. There are multiple input methods for Emacs, including voice control, Vi emulation, and a better Vi-esque key input method that isn't tied down to the archaic Vi terminology, but I digress.
Both of those points aren't very persuasive in favor of EXWM. They pinnacle of why I use Emacs as a tiling WM and will never go back to anything else is because of its key simulation. You can find some posts about it on /emacs/, but, basically, it means you never have to deal with any more key bindings but the ones that Emacs uses ever again. Back when Conkeror was a thing, a lot of people were excited because it emulated Emacs bindings (as well as some deeper mannerisms that were never fully realized, but that's beyond the point). I didn't care for it though, because I didn't really feel the need to use an Emacs emulator within Emacs, especially when I could manipulate text in FF just like I would in Emacs. For example when I push C-n, the screen goes down are my cursor goes down, C-i replaces tab, etc., etc.. It can also handle more complex macros. This is nice because, as we all know, FF has recently hardcoded a lot of its bindings. Even with extensions that do alter certain bindings, they won't affect select pages in Firefox; with key simulation, you can surmount this, and it can be applicable for literally all X applications, no settings required.
In fact, Emacs can augment the behavior in some more ways, the most notable being exwm-edit. Right now, like in pic related, I'm editing this text with Emacs in markdown-mode. When I press C-c C-c, it'll paste the text automatically in the text box. This is actually a very primitive extension compared to the edit-with-emacs module where FF spawns a server that renders the text in this buffer in parallel with that of a text form, but this module isn't specific to FF, so I prefer it.
Anyway, I didn't really write this to convince you, but maybe you'll get a better understanding of the rationale of people who use Emacs and tiling wm's. I definitely think EXWM is the best tiling WM in the market, but it does have its flaws--mainly Emacs' lack of asynchronicity. I don't know why simulation keys aren't a feature of all wm's, but it's a really profound feature.