Zsh Mailing List Archive
Messages sorted by:
Reverse Date,
Date,
Thread,
Author
Re: Patch available for 3.0.6-pre-0
- X-seq: zsh-workers 6089
- From: "Bart Schaefer" <schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: zsh-workers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: Patch available for 3.0.6-pre-0
- Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 22:53:56 -0700
- In-reply-to: <199904221543.AAA09973@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Mailing-list: contact zsh-workers-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; run by ezmlm
- References: <199904221543.AAA09973@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
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
Messages sorted by:
Reverse Date,
Date,
Thread,
Author