From: "Bart Schaefer" <schaefer@brasslantern.com>
To: Anthony Heading <ajrh@woland.demon.co.uk>,
Andrew Main <zefram@tao.co.uk>,
zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu
Subject: Re: zsh-3.1.2-zefram3
Date: Sun, 18 Jan 1998 09:38:36 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <980118093836.ZM5175@candle.brasslantern.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <19980118151413.39927@woland>
On Jan 18, 3:14pm, Anthony Heading wrote:
} Subject: Re: zsh-3.1.2-zefram3
}
} On Mon, Jan 12, 1998 at 11:27:05AM +0000, Andrew Main wrote:
} > I'd particularly like to discuss the recent ZLE-related feature patches:
} > [...]
} > N 3554 ajrh allow vared to succeed on EOF
} > This can be done by temporarily rebinding ^D to accept-line, or
} > to a user-defined widget that conditionally calls accept-line.
This is true, but seems clumsy especially because the EOF char is normally
overloaded as delete-char-or-list. You'd be forced to write a user-defined
widget that implemented `delete-char-or-list-or-eof' to make it work right.
On the other hand, I don't believe that vared *should* behave the way that
typing text into `cat` would. Vared is not a streaming editor; I expect
it to behave like an editor that controls my terminal, not like a process
blindly reading from standard input.
} PREMISE:
} I would aver that the EOF char acting as accept-line is a natural
} default (viz my original desire to emulate the RCS check-in input).
I would aver that there shouldn't *be* any recognized EOF char in vared,
just as there is no EOF in vi or emacs. That is, as best I can tell, the
current behavior.
} PRIMARY HANDLING OF EOF:
} In zleread()
}
} - if (!ll && isfirstln && c == eofchar) {
} + if (c == eofchar && cs == ll && cs == findbol()) {
} eofsent = 1;
} break;
} }
}
} I think that this is an improvement.
How exactly does this change the behavior, again? EOF on any empty line
is EOF, even in a multiline edit? Yes, I object to that. I want EOF to
be EOF when typed on an empty line at a PS1 prompt, and nowhere else.
} I think the condition has been
} changed at least once already in the past year, but nobody discussed
} it and nobody complained, so preservation of the status-quo may have
} been demonstrated de-facto not to be an overriding imperative.
The condition changed from 3.0.2 to 3.0.3, adding the "&& isfirstln".
That was sometime before 27 June 1997. I don't know exactly what that
accomplished.
} VARED HANDLING OF -c:
}
} Perhaps Zefram missed the fact that the patch retained the -c flag as
} a null op? The balance as always is cost (incompatibility) against
} benefit (here simplicity). I still suspect that the incompatibilty
} is minimal: that no-one relies on that error condition in scripts.
Scripts are not the only case to consider; I dislike having my interactive
habits disrupted, too. In this case, this wouldn't bother *me*, but ....
} VARED HANDLING OF EOF:
}
} If you like, we could swap the sense of the -e flag and keep the
} current behaviour as the default.
That would be preferable.
} USE OF ZLE WIDGETS:
}
} This is probably the point where I become unhinged. At least in the
} environment where I work, flexibility in user-space configuration is
} absolutely no substitute for a satisfactory default.
I agree completely.
} Nu chto zh.
What?
--
Bart Schaefer Brass Lantern Enterprises
http://www.well.com/user/barts http://www.brasslantern.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1998-01-18 17:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1998-01-12 11:27 zsh-3.1.2-zefram3 Andrew Main
1998-01-13 9:29 ` zsh-3.1.2-zefram3 on Solaris Andrei Tcherepanov
1998-01-13 11:46 ` Andrew Main
1998-01-18 15:14 ` zsh-3.1.2-zefram3 Anthony Heading
1998-01-18 17:38 ` Bart Schaefer [this message]
1998-01-19 8:58 ` zsh-3.1.2-zefram3 Peter Stephenson
1998-01-21 18:37 ` zsh-3.1.2-zefram3 Anthony Heading
1998-01-13 11:44 zsh-3.1.2-zefram3 Bruce Stephens
1998-01-13 12:19 ` zsh-3.1.2-zefram3 Andrew Main
1998-01-13 12:49 ` zsh-3.1.2-zefram3 Bruce Stephens
1998-01-13 13:36 ` zsh-3.1.2-zefram3 Peter Stephenson
1998-01-13 15:04 ` zsh-3.1.2-zefram3 Bruce Stephens
1998-01-13 11:56 zsh-3.1.2-zefram3 Sven Wischnowsky
1998-01-13 11:59 zsh-3.1.2-zefram3 Bruce Stephens
1998-01-13 12:24 ` zsh-3.1.2-zefram3 Andrew Main
1998-01-13 12:44 ` zsh-3.1.2-zefram3 Bruce Stephens
1998-01-20 0:46 zsh-3.1.2-zefram3 Gene Cohler
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=980118093836.ZM5175@candle.brasslantern.com \
--to=schaefer@brasslantern.com \
--cc=ajrh@woland.demon.co.uk \
--cc=zefram@tao.co.uk \
--cc=zsh-workers@math.gatech.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.vuxu.org/mirror/zsh/
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).