> On Oct 7, 2017, at 9:07 PM, Greg Reagle <greg.rea...@umbc.edu> wrote: > >> On Sat, Oct 7, 2017, at 20:18, Mark Volkmann wrote: >> Here's another way to test this. >> - open two fish sessions >> - in the first, enter "echo one" >> - in the second, enter "echo two" >> - in the first, enter "echo three" >> - in the second, enter "echo four" >> >> Enter "tail ~/.local/share/fish/fish_history" in both. Of course they >> will >> be identical (same file) and will contain all four echo commands. >> But command recall in either session only recalls the echo commands >> entered >> in that session. >> I don't think there is enough information in the fish_history file to >> support doing that, so something else must be at play. >> Another interesting thing is that if you enter "history -n 5" in both, >> you >> will only see the echo commands entered in the session where that command >> is run. >> So I'm still wondering how fish is able to keep the commands from each >> session separate. > > Okay, I see your point and I think I understand what you are asking. I > know nothing about the internals of fish since I am just a user, but I > conclude that a fish session uses *all* of the history file *before* the > start of the session, and only its *own* history *after* the start of > the session. Whether it does that via RAM or selective use of the > history file I don't know.
Can someone in the know explain how fish is able to do this? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot _______________________________________________ Fish-users mailing list Fish-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fish-users
