Re: [dev] [st][patch] scrollback buffer

From: Edgaras <devoas_AT_gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 17:01:11 +0300

On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 12:00:05PM -0500, Strake wrote:
> On 16/10/2013, Jochen Sprickerhof <dwm_AT_jochen.sprickerhof.de> wrote:
> > I've implemented a (limited) scrollback buffer for st. Thanks to v4hn
> > for testing and improving first versions.
>
> Thanks! This was the last reason against my st adoption.
>
> On 16/10/2013, Christoph Lohmann <20h_AT_r-36.net> wrote:
> > You can add it as a patch to the wiki but it won’t be included in main‐
> > line. Scrollback is what you have other applications for. Because next
> > you will want scrollback selection, scrollback editing and scrollback
> > history files. Other people solved these problems in software already.
>
> Yes:
>
> * Clearly xterm, rxvt, et al have done, but their lossage is the reason for st.
> * Terminal multiplexers have done, but suckless already has its own
> terminal multiplexer what hasn't: dwm.
>

As for scrollback in terminal, at first it seemed very annoying as I was uses
to it. But after using st without that I really dont see much need for that,
and would consider it bloat, since it is already implemented in other places.

Lets go about them for a bit.

There are multiplexers (which I use quite little, and my choice is dvtm since
it does not have session managment/detaching). They can be used for that, and I
agree with someone who said that they are not very elegant as they are simply
terminal in terminal. Still they give that function.

Next we have TUI apps like irssi or VIM where scrollback in terminal makes no
sense for them, since they handle it themselves. Moreover the current st
behaviour with mouse wheel and sending approporiate keypresses to aplication is
way cooler than scroll buffer, makes VIM and "less" more usefull.

And so there is less, for paging pure CLI programs. There is also file
redirection.

So I'm with Christop here, this should be just optional patch/feature. As I
think it a step away from minimalism, maybe a minimal step, but still a step
away.
Received on Fri Oct 18 2013 - 16:01:11 CEST