[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[bug#62056] [PATCH] guix: Only issue erase-current-line sequence for tty
From: |
Bruno Victal |
Subject: |
[bug#62056] [PATCH] guix: Only issue erase-current-line sequence for ttys. |
Date: |
Sat, 18 Mar 2023 11:27:12 +0000 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.8.0 |
Hi Ludo’,
On 2023-03-16 21:30, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Bruno Victal <mirai@makinata.eu> skribis:
>> (define (erase-current-line port)
>> - "Write an ANSI erase-current-line sequence to PORT to erase the whole
>> line and
>> -move the cursor to the beginning of the line."
>> - (display "\r\x1b[K" port))
>> + "When @var{port} is interactive, write an ANSI erase-current-line sequence
>> +to erase the whole line and move the cursor to the beginning of the line,
>> +otherwise write a newline."
>> + (if (isatty? port)
>> + (display "\r\x1b[K" port)
>> + (newline port)))
>
> We should avoid calling ‘isatty?’ every time, it’s too costly, which is
> why there’s also ‘isatty?*’ somewhere that memoizes things.
>
> However, it seems up to the caller to check that before calling
> ‘erase-current-line’. That seems to be the case within progress.scm and
> in (guix status).
guix/status.scm:471 defines a erase-current-line* which calls isatty?*.
Does this mean that erase-current-line has to be “wrapped” every time
we want it to have tty awareness?
If that's not the case, perhaps we could change the signature of
erase-current-line to:
(define* (erase-current-line port #:optional tty?)
> Could you see which use of ‘erase-current-line’ is causing problems?
guix/scripts/substitute.scm:318
Cheers,
Bruno