[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Explicitly document \001 and \002?

From: Chet Ramey
Subject: Re: Explicitly document \001 and \002?
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2021 14:58:43 -0400
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.9.1

On 4/16/21 1:23 PM, Mingye Wang wrote:

Readline currently uses SOH (\001) and STX (\002) to label parts of
the text that does not use up screen space, but from the documentation
point of view it is hidden behind the C macros

Sure, the document describes the C language bindings for readline. Do
users expect a one-to-one mapping between those bindings and bindings
for a different language? I admit that I haven't looked at, say, what
the python bindings provide.

This makes the
documentation inaccessible to people using readline from other
languages (including bash PS1 via command substitution), unless the
binding explicitly provides these constants.

I can document the current values, while reserving the right to change
them someday.

Doesn't it make sense for these other language bindings to include the
constants or their equivalents? (I know, I know, tilting at windmills
and all that.)


``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer
                 ``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates
Chet Ramey, UTech, CWRU    chet@case.edu    http://tiswww.cwru.edu/~chet/

reply via email to

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