4 ms·
People who do not understand things are poised to reinvent them badly. The post manage to analyse terminal input without having acknowledging readline. So yeah
by ploum 4y ago
People who do not understand things are poised to reinvent them badly.
The post manage to analyse terminal input without having acknowledging readline. So yeah, they have no idea what they are talking about.
https://www.masteringemacs.org/article/keyboard-shortcuts-every-command-line-hacker-should-know-about-gnu-readline https://www.masteringemacs.org/article/keyboard-shortcuts-ev...
- sureglymop 4y agoThey fail to understand that this isn't a problem of the terminal at all... The terminals only job is to display output and to pass through input. They could write an "interactive shell" with mouse support that implements all those features and it would run in any pre existing terminal. They could even make this work with existing shells and it would work over ssh ect. Nothing against innovation but this is the wrong approach imo.
- brenns10 4y agoI also disagree with this article's approach, but it seems pretty disingenuous to say that they don't understand terminal input because they didn't mention readline. After all, this is a blog post on the site for a terminal implementation. They'd have to be unbelievably ignorant to not be aware of the role of readline here. They're not writing a technical deep dive, they're presenting their vision for a different approach. I think that vision is flawed but I'm not going to grade them on how deep they get into implementation details.