On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 11:11:05PM +0200, Quentin Rameau wrote:
> > nevertheless I do think that all this still doesn't justify a
> > scrollback buffer built into st itself. Instead of mandating the use
> > of tmux et al, I would rather put a helper tool into the st repo, that
> > works as a basic shell wrapper process (no detaching). It would
> > implement the scrollback buffer only and allow to define its size in a
> > more flexible way (possibly via a command line argument) and also the
> > control sequences / key combos to actually scroll around. The tool
> > name could be stsb or something similar.
> >
> > What do you think about this compromise?
>
> This is actually something that has been discussed for some time now
> and we agreed this is the way to do it (in view of st).
>
> But nobody really took the time to go for it yet, although emg have a
> rough one he started working on a few months ago, but I think he didn't
> really have time to continue on it.
Where can we look at its current state?
Though the fact that someone has to find time to "continue"
implementation of a scrollback suggests that approach is wrong.
Scrollback patch [1] adds 98 lines and removes 25 according to diffstat.
If implementing it separately takes significantly more effort than that,
it is probably not worth it.
[1]
http://st.suckless.org/patches/scrollback
Received on Tue Mar 28 2017 - 00:40:53 CEST