[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Update terminfo entry for 'iterm'

From: Thomas Dickey
Subject: Re: Update terminfo entry for 'iterm'
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2017 17:51:04 -0400
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)

On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 12:19:31PM +0200, Leonardo Brondani Schenkel wrote:
> On 2017-08-16 10:14, Thomas Dickey wrote:
> >On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 07:27:22AM +0200, Leonardo Brondani Schenkel wrote:
> >>Which version did you test? I have iTerm2 3.0.15 and italic
> >>definitely works (just tested again now), and on
> >>Preferences/Profiles/Text there's a checkbox that says "Italic text
> >>allowed". I *think* I never changed the default profile (I have a
> >>custom one) and it is enabled in my box.
> >
> >looking again, I see the setting (I was looking for "Font"...).
> >I'm certain that I did not change it - see attached screenshot.

moving the preferences aside and re-creating them got the current defaults.

> >Of course, documentation (i.e., a manual listing the default settings)
> >would be useful.  I was reading the sources, found no documentation
> >aside from a couple of readme's and program comments.
> I'm not a Mac developer, so I may be misinterpreting this, but I
> found these two places which may be the defaults:
> https://github.com/gnachman/iTerm2/blob/master/plists/DefaultBookmark.plist#L245
> https://github.com/gnachman/iTerm2/blob/master/sources/iTermProfilePreferences.m#L251

agreed: that's source code, not to be mistaken for documentation.

(I took a quick look at the history to see when italics' default was
changed, but that ran into a lot of file renaming, and the web interface
is a poor tool for jumping past that...)
> But just for the sake of argument and my own understanding of your
> reasoning, if we assume that the default for the setting is "off",
> what would be the drawback of adding the italic sequences to
> terminfo? The end result would still be that italic wouldn't work
> for people who haven't enabled the setting (so no change there), but
> it would work otherwise (which is a plus). What am I missing from
> this trade-off?

developers turn on a feature like that, expecting it to make something
more visible.  When they're wrong, nothing happens, nothing is made
more visible...

Thomas E. Dickey <address@hidden>

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]