Re: lynx-dev lynx2.8.4dev.3

[Thomas Dickey]

On Sat, Jun 03, 2000 at 10:46:35PM +0500, Vlad Harchev wrote:
> On Sat, 3 Jun 2000, Thomas Dickey wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 03, 2000 at 08:21:53PM +0500, Vlad Harchev wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2 Jun 2000, Thomas Dickey wrote:
> > > > 2000-06-02 (2.8.4dev.3)
> > > >[...]
> > > > * remove unused fragments of backspace logic from print_crawl_to_fd() 
> > > > -TD
> > >    
> > >   I'm not sure that that backspace logic is really unused (seems a
> > 
> > it could not have been used because it was missing the middle chunk of
> > logic that would make the backspaces actually come out.  (whether it
> > is good to put backspaces in a report-file is another matter).
> 
>   If user requested that behaviour via command line explicitly, we should
> assume that it's good for them. But this is very unusual use of backspaces, I
> agree, and it could be safe to leave things as they are now (i.e. not to
> revert the mods).

but it doesn't _do_ anything.  That function is missing this chunk:

#ifndef NO_DUMP_WITH_BACKSPACES
                if (in_b) {
                    fputc(line->data[i], fp);
                    fputc('\b',fp);
                    fputc(line->data[i], fp);
                } else if (in_u) {
                    fputc('_',fp);
                    fputc('\b',fp);
                    fputc(line->data[i], fp);
                } else
#endif

so I removed the fragments.
> > 
> > no - it actually was a bug (observed)
> 
>   Sorry, what exactly was a bug (the fact that modification was necessary or
> there was a bug in the logic?). Your reply could be interpreted in two ways.

the latter - there was no logic preventing the backspaces from being applied
to is_reply (not exactly the behavior one would expect when composing email).

-- 
Thomas E. Dickey <address@hidden>
http://dickey.his.com
ftp://dickey.his.com

; To UNSUBSCRIBE: Send "unsubscribe lynx-dev" to address@hidden