|Subject:||Re: [Chicken-users] readline egg v2.0 feedback|
|Date:||Mon, 02 Feb 2015 18:01:12 -0700|
|User-agent:||Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0|
Just pushed 3.0 out the door. Please let me know if it isn't
regnoized as the latest version and I'll bump it up to 3.1.|
And let me know if yall come across any bugs.
It introduces the following toplevel commands:
Most of the functions added by v2.0 have been removed in 3.0;
this, unfortunately, includes the history searching functions.
However, the history searching functions will be added back
again in the next (proper) release, which should be 3.1.
On 01/27/2015 11:10 AM, Evan Hanson wrote:
Hi Alexej, My tuppence: On 2015-01-27 4:01, Alexej Magura wrote:I don't think I'll use the toplevel-command stuff after all: I can't promise that the toplevel symbols readline exports won't get overwritten, and I'm not entirely sure readline has any business providing private toplevel symbols that are only applicable to it. It might confuse less-experienced users*, for one, and for another there's the already mentioned possibility of symbol collision, unless somebody more knowledge on this subject can prove otherwise.It's your call of course, but I'd urge you not to let this stop you if you'd otherwise like to provide this feature. If all commands are prefixed by "rl", for example, the ease of use would outweight any risk of conflicts, IMO. After all, extensions are expected to provide commands; that's part of what the feature's there for. chicken-doc uses it to great effect, for example. Perhaps you could address the concern that users will mistake readline-provided commands for builtins by adding a note that they come from the readline egg to the commands' help strings? Cheers, Evan
|[Prev in Thread]||Current Thread||[Next in Thread]|