Re: [dev] [st] goals / non-goals for st?

On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 11:41 PM, Aurélien
Aptel<aurelien.aptel_AT_gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 9:28 PM, Anselm R Garbe<garbeam_AT_gmail.com> wrote:
>> 2009/8/22 Ray Kohler <ataraxia937_AT_gmail.com>:
>>> I'm rather curious on where st will go, and what kinds of things other
>>> terminals do that it will or won't do.
>>
>> Well my plan is to achieve *good* xterm compliance and 256 color
>> support. As you know xterm is not really fully vt100 or vt220
>> compliant, so that's also not a goal of st.
> Full xterm support will be difficult. There are lots of features in
> its terrible source code. Just check the official README, it's kind of
> scary:

Never mind garbeam, he is being delusional as usual.

uriel

>
>>                        Abandon All Hope, Ye Who Enter Here
>>
>>
>> This is undoubtedly the most ugly program in the distribution.  It was one of
>> the first "serious" programs ported, and still has a lot of historical baggage.
>> Ideally, there would be a general tty widget and then vt102 and tek4014
>> subwidgets so that they could be used in other programs.  We are trying to
>> clean things up as we go, but there is still a lot of work to do.
>
>
>>> In particular:
>>> - Is a scrollback buffer objectionable in principle, such that we
>>> should expect to "just use GNU screen"?
> IMHO the scrollback buffer is useless since you can use different
> tools (as you said) to achieve that ($PAGER, screen, etc).
>
>>> - Will it implement enough of xterm's capabilities that I could lie
>>> about $TERM and expect it to mostly work? I log into many remote
>>> machines of various OS types and ages, and some of them don't make it
>>> easy to install user-specific terminfo entries.
> GNU screen handle this by fallbacking to vt100. See
> <http://www.slac.stanford.edu/comp/unix/package/epics/extensions/iocConsole/screen.1.html#lbAN>
>
>
Received on Wed Aug 26 2009 - 00:39:31 UTC