From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1955 invoked from network); 24 Apr 1999 06:24:26 -0000 Received: from ns2.primenet.com.au (HELO primenet.com.au) (?jobGpqA5EKyNNcDmLVlr/hE4jPmjCKa4?@203.24.36.3) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 24 Apr 1999 06:24:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 5108 invoked from network); 24 Apr 1999 05:57:44 -0000 Received: from sunsite.auc.dk (130.225.51.30) by 203.24.36.3 with SMTP; 24 Apr 1999 05:57:44 -0000 Received: (qmail 29902 invoked by alias); 24 Apr 1999 05:55:23 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.auc.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 6089 Received: (qmail 29888 invoked from network); 24 Apr 1999 05:55:17 -0000 From: "Bart Schaefer" Message-Id: <990423225356.ZM26290@candle.brasslantern.com> Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 22:53:56 -0700 In-Reply-To: <199904221543.AAA09973@pop1.ngy.3web.ne.jp> Comments: In reply to Tatsuo Furukawa "Re: Patch available for 3.0.6-pre-0" (Apr 23, 12:07am) References: <199904221543.AAA09973@pop1.ngy.3web.ne.jp> X-Mailer: Z-Mail (4.0b.820 20aug96) To: zsh-workers@sunsite.auc.dk Subject: Re: Patch available for 3.0.6-pre-0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Apr 23, 12:07am, Tatsuo Furukawa wrote: } Subject: Re: Patch available for 3.0.6-pre-0 } } I think that most of users is NOT affected by this patch. Because } NORMAL terminal has RI= entry. If the terminal has RI= entry, zsh } will use it. If it doesn't, zsh will use another method (TAB will be } used). So, maybe, I think you will not affect any more. } } But, I am begining to think that it is not interesting to apply } degrade patch. So, I wrote a new patch. :-) } } I added the code that zsh supports 'ch=' entry. } And I found that zle_refresh.c has two similar function. } (tc_rightcurs() and singmoveto()). I modified tc_rightcurs(). I'd like at least Geoff's opinion before I commit to doing anything with this patch. In particular, emitting the ch capability may require up to six or seven bytes, where a relative horizontal or vertical move might require fewer (depending on distance). I'm not sure just how optimized this code is supposed to be. Also, the "if (pos <= vcs / 2)" test may be optimizing for an absolute move by tc_rightcurs(), and may not be as good any longer if tc_rightcurs() makes a relative motion. Geoff's the expert on what's supposed to be happening in here. -- Bart Schaefer Brass Lantern Enterprises http://www.well.com/user/barts http://www.brasslantern.com