On 12/11/11 02:46, Ian MacArthur wrote:
> OK, maybe not VT100. Maybe VT220 then? :-)
Ooo, pixels!
I actually did render a mandelbrot on a VT220 back in 1986 once.. my
first
unix program, and it was all rendered with those ESC sequences. Took
forever.
Shot an animation with a bolex. It was green+white pixels.. fun/crazy
times.
>> Actually, IMHO it'd work fine for rich text.
>> Not sure I can think of a reason why it's worse
>> than any other.
>
> Agreed. The only reason it's worse than any other is that it will (inevitably)
> trigger a cascade of "Why did you not use markup <X> for this?" type
> questions,
> where <X> is one of a number of options. nroff anyone?
LOL, I imagine we can add that too (HTML was suggested, and perhaps
a good option for the future as well)
> This sounds interesting to me. Though I'm not sure if I'd ever use it,
> it does seem like a useful feature and might be quite cheap to add...
It is pretty cheap, and fast; in my app the reports can be
quite large, so speed was important.
Doing copy/paste from such an arrangement has the same issues
as '@'s though; you have to remove them when reading back data
from the widget, so that the ANSI sequences don't end up in
e.g. a user's copy/paste operation.
_______________________________________________
fltk-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.easysw.com/mailman/listinfo/fltk-dev
