29 May
2016
29 May
'16
7:55 p.m.
On 2016-05-29 19:40, John Wilson wrote:
Yeah. I expect more people to actually be sitting on a terminal emulator
which pretends to work like a VT100 (albeit almost invariably very
buggy) or an actual terminal which is VT100 compatible.
I also must mention that the screen handling is doing a pretty good job
in my editor. The one thing I really could improve would be to use the
insert/delete character functions and insert/delete line functions
introduced in the VT102. I haven't done that one yet, but apart from
that, I think it is doing very close to an optimal output to get the
results.
Johnny
--
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt at softjar.se || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol
From: Johnny Billquist <bqt at softjar.se>
It's gone faster than I thought, and the end code is smaller than I
expected (also considering that the PDP-11 C compiler isn't exactly
generating very good code).
With all that in mind, I decided to write my own
Emacs clone instead
(yes, I got horribly upset with the lousy quality of most code I looked
at, if someone wants to hear some rants, contact me privately).
I started about a month ago, and at this point, it's working, and quite
useful.
Way to go! Very impressive. . Only works
on ANSI terminals today. It would be doable to extend with
other terminal support, but I don't have any need, and since I do not
have, nor want to depend on curses, it will require coding to either
have a module to uses curses, if that is wanted, or handling of specific
terminals.
I agree. The days of dozens of choices of real terminals are long over,
so the amount of extra work you'd do just for that one time that someone
dusts off a Teleray 1061 just to open one file and then turn it off forever,
is really not worth it. Expecting someone doing real work to find an ANSI
terminal is totally fair.