From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 16515 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2000 07:27:22 -0000 Received: from sunsite.auc.dk (130.225.51.30) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 24 Jul 2000 07:27:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 7117 invoked by alias); 24 Jul 2000 07:26:58 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-users-help@sunsite.auc.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 3330 Received: (qmail 7014 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2000 07:26:53 -0000 From: "Bart Schaefer" Message-Id: <1000724072647.ZM18526@candle.brasslantern.com> Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 07:26:47 +0000 In-Reply-To: <200007240709.JAA05296@beta.informatik.hu-berlin.de> Comments: In reply to Sven Wischnowsky "Re: Tksh and dtksh replacements for Zsh-users?" (Jul 24, 9:09am) References: <200007240709.JAA05296@beta.informatik.hu-berlin.de> X-Mailer: Z-Mail (5.0.0 30July97) To: zsh-users@sunsite.auc.dk Subject: Re: Tksh and dtksh replacements for Zsh-users? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Jul 24, 9:09am, Sven Wischnowsky wrote: } } Bart Schaefer wrote: } } > did exactly that years ago for Z-Mail, although the version with Tk was } > never released. The zsh module would also have to install a couple of } > Tcl builtins to use for calling back to zsh functions, because the Tk } > event loop has to be allowed to take over control once the UI is ready } > to come up. } } If someone things about trying it, he should first try to define a } zwait() [...] That way we probably (hopefully) could respond to X-Events } asynchronously. If I recall correctly, this isn't sufficient for Tk -- it really does have to be in control, unless ztk were going to reimplement more of the bindings than what I described. Of course, my recollection is from Tk 4.something, so it could be a lot different now. -- Bart Schaefer Brass Lantern Enterprises http://www.well.com/user/barts http://www.brasslantern.com Zsh: http://www.zsh.org | PHPerl Project: http://phperl.sourceforge.net