On Sun, Feb 1, 2009 at 9:28 PM, Garance A Drosihn <drosih_at_rpi.edu> wrote: > At 3:22 PM -0800 1/31/09, Pedro F. Giffuni wrote: >> >> --- On Sat, 1/31/09, Mark Linimon <linimon_at_lonesome.com> wrote: >> >> On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 01:08:54PM -0800, Pedro F. Giffuni wrote: >> > > The effort didn't go far enough. Why haven't we removed GNU >> > > readline ? >> > >> > Probably either because someone hasn't written a BSD-licensed >> > one, or someone hasn't done the work to test-compile src and >> > ports on all the appropriate architectures. >> >> Wrong on both: >> >> - libedit has a readline compatibility mode that has replaced >> GNU readline in the other BSDs. > > One minor datapoint: I use readline in some program that is used > by several people on several platforms. One of those users was on > MacOS 10 (iirc), and used the libedit which was on that platform. > While it could be made compile-time compatible with readline, it > wasn't a completely adequate replacement for this program of ours. > > The guy who tried this said it was because our program takes > advantage of knowing some of the internals of what readline is > doing, so it can implement a few extra features. Now, that can > easily be said to be "the fault" of our program, but who's to say > that other programs don't do the same thing? As such, libedit is > not necessarily a drop-in replacement for libreadline. Someone > would have to do the legwork, and certainly I don't feel like > doing that legwork. I don't even feel like fixing that one program > of my own. It's *mostly* feature complete. The only thing that's really missing is libhistory, which is required for some things like python's readline support. Other programs like MySQL happily used libedit embedded into their source without issues. It all depends on what features people choose to use in GNU's readline that makes it compatible or not with libedit. -GarrettReceived on Mon Feb 02 2009 - 07:20:18 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:39:41 UTC