>I was envisioning just one function, that takes the terminfo symbolic >name of a capability and gives back the actual string.
Well ... it's not that simple. As I read it you need to parameterize it with tparm(), which means you need to take multiple arguments. This isn't so hard from the mh-format side of things, but there is no version of tparm which takes a stdarg, so you're stuck giving it a bunch of arguments. I don't know what happens if you don't give tparm enough arguments (or the wrong one) but I can imagine it wouldn't be hard to crash a program, and being able to crash a nmh program from a bug in a format string seems wrong. It seems like you're going to have to put some terminfo knowledge into the format lanaguage to make the implementation reasonable. Also, I can envision you might want to get some knowledge up from the terminfo layer; for example, if the terminal doesn't support color, maybe you want to use bold instead? If you have a format function that makes this available you can use it in a branch statement. >Good point. I'm inclined to think that it's a good idea to provide this >even if we also provide the terminfo-accessing function, since there is >always going to be somebody who wants to do something that doesn't fit >into what (his) terminfo knows. Seems reasonable to me as well. --Ken _______________________________________________ Nmh-workers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
