[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: edit-and-execute-command is appropriately named, weird

From: Chet Ramey
Subject: Re: edit-and-execute-command is appropriately named, weird
Date: Tue, 31 May 2011 12:20:54 -0400
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; en-US; rv: Gecko/20110414 Thunderbird/3.1.10

On 5/31/11 11:44 AM, David Thomas wrote:
> Oh, I wasn't asking you to do it, I was volunteering to.  I just
> wanted to be sure there wasn't some overriding reason it was done the
> way it was, and that there wouldn't be too many people relying on the
> present behavior.  As it is, I think I'll be taking a swing at it once
> my home internet is hooked up (which should be any day now...).

Please do.  I'd be very interested in what you come up with.  I'm sure
you're aware that the current function definition lives in bash
(bashline.c) rather than readline proper; if you implement there you
can employ all of the functionality bash provides.


``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer
                 ``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates
Chet Ramey, ITS, CWRU    address@hidden    http://cnswww.cns.cwru.edu/~chet/

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]