On Tue, Aug 22, 2006 at 11:02:53PM +0200, Axel Liljencrantz wrote: > >> But that would be silly in many ways, since _all_ the functionality > >> already lives inside fish, it's just reusing the same code. > >you could put it into a library, and link both programs against it, or, > >you could make fish accept the filename as indicator of which > >functionality you want to run. (like busybox) > Other shells can just use "fish -c 'read foo; echo $foo'". But I guess > it might make sense to have a standalone reading program. Worth > considering.
moreso, i just realized that given the existance of a readline library, it would make sense to have the fish readline code available as an alternative to that library. greetings, martin. -- cooperative communication with sTeam - caudium, pike, roxen and unix offering: programming, training and administration - anywhere in the world -- pike programmer travelling and working in europe open-steam.org unix system- bahai.or.at iaeste.(tuwien.ac|or).at administrator (caudium|gotpike).org is.schon.org Martin Bähr http://www.iaeste.or.at/~mbaehr/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ Fish-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fish-users
