> tradeoffs: > - all that stuff *is* so ugly and not completely understood by me, which is > partly why I was just going to stick with existing bash-interpreter and only > implement a terminal interface. I wonder if I can/should use the bash code > as a library... > - There is a certain amount of readline-ish implementation that does need to > be on that annoying implementation level: how to display syntax hilighting > to the terminal, do tab completion, and a few more things. Maybe this is > where I should try and share code with Fish (can one of you point me to > which Fish source files are for doing that stuff?)
I'm afraid not. I'm not that much of a developer, and I haven't ventured into the C sources (yet), just the bundled fish functions. Shells are all a matter of tradeoffs, and no-one has yet built one that's truly great. Not even up to the level that Python/Haskell/Lisp are in programming languages. I still think fish is the least of the evils I know. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Crystal Reports - New Free Runtime and 30 Day Trial Check out the new simplified licensing option that enables unlimited royalty-free distribution of the report engine for externally facing server and web deployment. http://p.sf.net/sfu/businessobjects _______________________________________________ Fish-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fish-users
