From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from whitecrow.demon.co.uk ([194.222.126.246]) by hawkwind.utcs.utoronto.ca with SMTP id <24783>; Tue, 21 Dec 1999 18:39:23 -0500 Received: from whitecrow.demon.co.uk (steve@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by whitecrow.demon.co.uk (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA30430 for ; Sun, 19 Dec 1999 11:06:54 GMT Message-Id: <199912191106.LAA30430@whitecrow.demon.co.uk> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0zeta 7/24/97 To: rc@hawkwind.utcs.toronto.edu Subject: Re: rc futures In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 16 Dec 1999 12:43:13 GMT." <19991216124313.10637.qmail@pantransit.reptiles.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Sun, 19 Dec 1999 06:06:54 -0500 From: Steve Kilbane When Tim mentioned "rc 2", I have to admit I was expecting something along the lines of "same functionality, 'better' internals". The amount and size of some of the changes being discussed is scary. ( different syntax, different variable handling, different execution semantics, and different input behaviour, and bigger, but otherwise business as usual ). And as Paul/Byron said, if you want some of this, go use es. The only one that makes sense to me is the error messages. I'd favour "rc:" on the command line, and "script-name:" for scripts. If you were going to always include "rc:", I'd want a space after it, so that it didn't confuse wily with "rc:script:nn". I'm not familiar with readline and its variants, having never explicitly gone out looking for it. Does it provide anything other than history recall and editing? If not, $history is enough to provide 99% of that functionality via an external program. steve