Re: GUI terminal widget

[Mike Miller]

On Mon, Jun 03, 2019 at 09:34:12 -0700, Rik wrote:
> From a strategic level, this is a big change.  What do we get from doing
> this (pros) and what do we lose (cons)?  Are there sufficient benefits to
> undertake this task?

It might also help to define what are the actual goals of the command
window replacement widget. What do we want the command window to do and
how do we want it to behave?

> Although the terminal often causes problems, it also allows for a lot of
> code re-use.  We use Readline for history and input processing.  We get
> 'less' and other utilities for free.  In replacing this, do we essentially
> need to re-invent the wheel?  That's a *lot* of coding effort for something
> that isn't even particularly Octave related.  Since your time is finite, if
> you are working on this then there will be other Octave bugs that aren't
> addressed.  Is the balance worthwhile?  You understand core Octave better
> than anyone so it may be that your time is better spent resolving 50 bugs
> there, rather than writing more generic terminal emulation code that other
> programmers could do.

I was under the impression that a replacement would be a more flexible
text rendering input area, for example being able to render inline
styled text with HTML or other markup, being able to move the cursor and
select text with the mouse. But I was also under the impression that it
would not be a full terminal emulator. That's the kind of command window
replacement I would find more useful and I think many users want.

If we do still want a full terminal emulator, then maybe we should push
for reusing something like qtermwidget, and helping to make it work on
all the systems we want to target?

-- 
mike

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature