Tal Einat <talei...@gmail.com> added the comment:

Terry, thanks for the detailed writing of your thoughts on the matter and their 
context.

Serhiy's argument (in msg246602) is that different terminals interpret 
different control characters in different ways, and that we have no way of 
unifying their behavior.  This is true, and I will add that we should also not 
aim to fully emulate any single terminal nor multiple types of terminals.

On the other hand, there is a common ground where the vast majority of 
terminals do, in fact, behave very similarly WRT control characters.  For 
example, IDLE already does interpret '\n' in a special way (partially because 
the underlying Tk text widget does).  The same goes for '\t'.

I argue that we should instead *slightly* expand the set of control characters 
which IDLE interprets, to include a few more which are universally treated in a 
consistent manner.

Looking at the list of ASCII control characters on Wikipedia[1], I don't think 
any beyond \a, \b, \n, \r and \t are universal enough and in common enough use 
to merit inclusion.  (For reference, \a is for "bell".)

..[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C0_and_C1_control_codes


I find the suggestion to have more than a single "mode" for the IDLE shell 
contrary to the "simple and novice friendly" design principle that we are 
aiming for.  I also think that it would bring little added benefit to the great 
majority of our users.


As for other control characters and astral characters, I very much agree that 
we could do better than to have them often "garbled" as done by the Tk text 
widget.  I think this should be dealt with as a separate issue.

----------

_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<https://bugs.python.org/issue37827>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe: 
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to