From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id MAA03752; Tue, 19 Jun 2001 12:07:25 +0200 (MET DST) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id MAA04132 for ; Tue, 19 Jun 2001 12:07:24 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr (dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr [130.79.6.1]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f5JA7NP19614 for ; Tue, 19 Jun 2001 12:07:23 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from lambda.u-strasbg.fr (mail@lambda.u-strasbg.fr [130.79.90.63]) by dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA01297; Tue, 19 Jun 2001 12:06:27 +0200 Received: from luther by lambda.u-strasbg.fr with local (Exim 3.22 #1 (Debian)) id 15CITJ-0006MO-00; Tue, 19 Jun 2001 12:10:57 +0200 Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2001 12:10:57 +0200 To: Jacques Garrigue Cc: skaller@ozemail.com.au, caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Caml toplevel and readline Message-ID: <20010619121057.B24428@lambda.u-strasbg.fr> References: <20010618093209.C12678@pauillac.inria.fr> <20010618184841N.garrigue@kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp> <3B2E2D9E.A85C2201@ozemail.com.au> <20010619103908W.garrigue@kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20010619103908W.garrigue@kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.18i From: Sven LUTHER Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk On Tue, Jun 19, 2001 at 10:39:08AM +0900, Jacques Garrigue wrote: > > Alternatively, why not build the toplevel > > with ledit? > > I suppose that most people at INRIA are already using it with ledit, > so they didn't think of including it. Also, ledit requires libunix, > but I don't know if the terminal capacities included in ocamlrun > would be enough in this case. The way it works currently, you probably > need pipes. But all this should be solvable. And ledit needs camlp4, right, but i gues syou could preprocess it or something like that ? > > > But the first man making a custom toplevel is dead: > > > having both in the same file won't do. > > > > I am the one linking it into the toplevel, not INRIA. > > It will have no impact on me, since I do not use the top > > level for producing code (only for testing the occasional > > small fragments). > > The standard distribution already contains a labltk toplevel, linked > in custom mode. And INRIA distributes binaries. But they could distribute them without libreadline being used. Sure this would mean more work, but i think if someone contribute a patch for supporting it, they would gladly accept it. That said adding ledit or something similar to ocaml would be nice. Did not some incarnation of caml-light had some kind of librealine like functionality ? what happened to that ? Or was it just librealine and it was removed, because of the licensing issue ? Friendly, Sven Luther ------------------- Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr