Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 - EditLine / terminal incompatibility?

[Simon Marlow]

Simon Marlow wrote:

I think it's a good idea to avoid variant licenses, especially in 
libraries.  We want it to be easy for someone to know whether they're 
complying with the licenses for the libraries they depend on, and if 
those licenses depend on choices made at the time the library was built, 
then it's much harder.


Oh, I should add that ghci-bin (or whatever) is an application, not a 
library, so it's less of an issue for it to have a variant license.


Cheers,
Simon
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 - EditLine / terminal incompatibility?

[Simon Marlow]

Duncan Coutts wrote:

On Fri, 2008-11-21 at 14:01 +, Simon Marlow wrote:


I propose we do this:

  * extract the GHCi UI from the GHC package, put it in the ghc-bin package
(maybe we should rename this package to ghc-main or something).  This
removes the editline and bytestring (for now) dependencies from the GHC
package.


This is good independently of the other suggestions.


  * Move to Haskeline for the default build.  We have to bring in terminfo
and utf8-string as bootlibs.  This gives us line-editing on Windows,
and removes problematic external C library dependencies.


I think this is worth trying. It seems like Judah is prepared to put the
work in to make haskeline work on various platforms and to trim the
dependencies.

Eg I'd rather us decide what to do about Unicode input rather than just
end up de-facto standardising the utf8-string package. It seemed like we
had a consensus on what to do for the H98 IO with Unicode. We just need
to get on with it.


Yes - I did some work on this, but didn't finish it.  Unfortunately trying 
to shoehorn encodings into the IO library isn't pretty, and I became a bit 
disillusioned.  I could probably still get it working, but I think I was 
really hoping that a better architecture for the IO library might emerge, 
and so far it didn't :-)


> In addition we need to agree some control over

encoding when using a specific encoding is called for (eg reading a file
that is known to be UTF-16 independent of the locale).


Right, this will certainly be possible when we have System.IO doing 
encoding/decoding, we just need to agree on an API.



Oops - except that
this would mean that the ghc-main package has a variant license.  So
maybe we have to have a separate ghc-readline package?


A variant license isn't a fundamental technical problem though perhaps
the consensus is that variant licenses are a "bad thing". I'm not sure.
One would have to use OtherLicense and specify what the conditions are
in the license file.


I think it's a good idea to avoid variant licenses, especially in 
libraries.  We want it to be easy for someone to know whether they're 
complying with the licenses for the libraries they depend on, and if those 
licenses depend on choices made at the time the library was built, then 
it's much harder.


Cheers,
Simon

___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 - EditLine / terminal incompatibility?

[Ian Lynagh]

On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 01:49:43PM +, Duncan Coutts wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-11-21 at 14:01 +, Simon Marlow wrote:
> 
> >   * Move to Haskeline for the default build.  We have to bring in terminfo
> > and utf8-string as bootlibs.  This gives us line-editing on Windows,
> > and removes problematic external C library dependencies.
> 
> I think this is worth trying. It seems like Judah is prepared to put the
> work in to make haskeline work on various platforms and to trim the
> dependencies.
> 
> Eg I'd rather us decide what to do about Unicode input rather than just
> end up de-facto standardising the utf8-string package.

Right, if we're targetting this for 6.12 then there's no rush (and we
have some time until 6.10.2, too, if we decide to change things for
that). I think we should step back and think about whether utf8-string
is the package that we're going to want to use for:
* IO in the base libraries
* The ptext function in Text.PrettyPrint
* Implementing FastString on top of
as we really want all of these to use the same library.


Thanks
Ian

___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 - EditLine / terminal incompatibility?

[Duncan Coutts]

On Fri, 2008-11-21 at 14:01 +, Simon Marlow wrote:

> I propose we do this:
> 
>   * extract the GHCi UI from the GHC package, put it in the ghc-bin package
> (maybe we should rename this package to ghc-main or something).  This
> removes the editline and bytestring (for now) dependencies from the GHC
> package.

This is good independently of the other suggestions.

>   * Move to Haskeline for the default build.  We have to bring in terminfo
> and utf8-string as bootlibs.  This gives us line-editing on Windows,
> and removes problematic external C library dependencies.

I think this is worth trying. It seems like Judah is prepared to put the
work in to make haskeline work on various platforms and to trim the
dependencies.

Eg I'd rather us decide what to do about Unicode input rather than just
end up de-facto standardising the utf8-string package. It seemed like we
had a consensus on what to do for the H98 IO with Unicode. We just need
to get on with it. In addition we need to agree some control over
encoding when using a specific encoding is called for (eg reading a file
that is known to be UTF-16 independent of the locale).

>   * Make it possible to compile the ghc-bin package against readline.
> Upload ghc-bin to Hackage, so people can say
>cabal install ghc-bin -f readline
> and get a GHCi built against readline if they want.

If haskeline "works" then I doubt there will be much pressure for
readline support. The pining for the "good old days of readline" at the
moment are only because editline clearly doesn't "work".

[For some definition of "work"]

> Oops - except that
> this would mean that the ghc-main package has a variant license.  So
> maybe we have to have a separate ghc-readline package?

A variant license isn't a fundamental technical problem though perhaps
the consensus is that variant licenses are a "bad thing". I'm not sure.
One would have to use OtherLicense and specify what the conditions are
in the license file.


Duncan

___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 - EditLine / terminal incompatibility?

[Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH]

On 2008 Nov 21, at 9:01, Simon Marlow wrote:
* extract the GHCi UI from the GHC package, put it in the ghc-bin  
package
  (maybe we should rename this package to ghc-main or something).   
This
  removes the editline and bytestring (for now) dependencies from  
the GHC

  package.

* Move to Haskeline for the default build.  We have to bring in  
terminfo

  and utf8-string as bootlibs.  This gives us line-editing on Windows,
  and removes problematic external C library dependencies.

* Make it possible to compile the ghc-bin package against readline.
  Upload ghc-bin to Hackage, so people can say
 cabal install ghc-bin -f readline
  and get a GHCi built against readline if they want.  Oops - except  
that

  this would mean that the ghc-main package has a variant license.  So
  maybe we have to have a separate ghc-readline package?



My humble opinion:

Dissociate ghc-bin and ghci from ghc; the latter is actually ghci- 
{haskeline,readline,editline,noediting,...}.  (Does cabal have virtual  
packages yet?)


There is a corresponding library issue, though:   
System.Console.Readline.  I'd handle this by having packages which  
export their own namespaces... but we'd like to have a generic  
interface too so someone can write a program using any available  
editing package.  So, have the packages also output a module which is  
by default hidden, and allow the user to select which one is used by  
unhiding it.  (This might lead to wanting additional cabal  
functionality:  "preferred" packages.  Or maybe flags already handle  
that well enough.)


--
brandon s. allbery [solaris,freebsd,perl,pugs,haskell] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
system administrator [openafs,heimdal,too many hats] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
electrical and computer engineering, carnegie mellon universityKF8NH


___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 - EditLine / terminal incompatibility?

[Judah Jacobson]

On 11/21/08, Simon Marlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I propose we do this:
>
>  * extract the GHCi UI from the GHC package, put it in the ghc-bin package
>   (maybe we should rename this package to ghc-main or something).  This
>   removes the editline and bytestring (for now) dependencies from the GHC
>   package.
>
>  * Move to Haskeline for the default build.  We have to bring in terminfo
>   and utf8-string as bootlibs.
>
> This gives us line-editing on Windows, and removes problematic external C
> library dependencies.

Just so it's clear, Haskeline on POSIX does require (n)curses, an
external C library, in order to access terminfo capabilities portably.
 But in my experience curses is much more widely available by default
than readline or editline, so I still think this is a significant
improvement.

>  * Make it possible to compile the ghc-bin package against readline.
>   Upload ghc-bin to Hackage, so people can say
>  cabal install ghc-bin -f readline
>   and get a GHCi built against readline if they want.  Oops - except that
>   this would mean that the ghc-main package has a variant license.  So
>   maybe we have to have a separate ghc-readline package?

That sounds reasonable.  As a side note, I'm very interested to learn
of any more issues with Haskeline that would make it less preferable
than the readline backend.

-Judah
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

Re: ghci-haskeline (was: Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 - EditLine / terminal incompatibility?)

[Judah Jacobson]

On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 2:27 AM, Simon Marlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Judah Jacobson wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 7:16 AM, Ian Lynagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Although another option would be to make GHCi a separate (GPL) frontend
>>> to the (BSD) GHC API. The only downside is that (with static linking) we
>>> have another large binary. Another upside is that other GHC API users
>>> don't get an editline dependency.
>>
>> I've actually been experimenting with something similar:
>>
>> darcs get http://code.haskell.org/~judah/ghci-haskeline/
>>
>> If you have ghc-6.10.1, 'cabal install'ing inside that repo will give
>> you a version of ghci which uses Haskeline as its backend.
>>
>> Basically, I copied 4 modules from the GHC source tree (GhciMonad,
>> InteractiveUI, GhciTags and Main) and modifed them to use Haskeline;
>> the rest of GHC is obtained through the API.
>
> BTW, your LICENSE file looks like it was copied from the GHC source tree, it
> still has various references to GHC and the University of Glasgow.

The vast majority of code in that project is copied directly from the
GHC source tree, and any changes I've made are intended to be merged
back into GHC (or a ghci subproject); so I thought it easiest just to
keep the code under the same license and copyright.  Is there a better
way to do this?

-Judah
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 - EditLine / terminal incompatibility?

[Judah Jacobson]

On 11/21/08, Duncan Coutts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-11-21 at 11:59 +0100, Philip K.F. Hölzenspies wrote:
> > On Friday 21 November 2008 10:49:47 Jules Bean wrote:
>
> > > Something must be very very broken : surely it is not expected behaviour
> > > for editline to need configuration in this way?
> >
> > One can call it broken, another will say users should settle for the default
> > behaviour. Neither readline, nor editline *need* configuration this way,
> > because they do come with sensible defaults.
>
> But that's just it. It seems that readline does come with sensible
> defaults and editline does not. For example xterm is not a rare kind of
> terminal (basically every terminal in use claims to be xterm) and yet
> delete does not work with it out-of-the-box with editline. That is
> broken.
>
> [To add insult to injury, even when I look up the escape sequence for
> delete using the cat/telnet trick, I still cannot configure editline to
> recognise it.]

After further investigation, I think this technically isn't a terminal
compatibility issue, but rather a missing feature; i.e., editline just
doesn't intentionally support using the delete key.  The command
ed-delete-next-char which we found in the editrc manpage is really
meant to represent pressing 'x' in the vi bindings, which is why it
hasn't been working as expected.  AFAICT, editline has no command
equivalent to pressing 'delete'.

Of course, regardless of the cause, the net result (delete key not
working) is the same.  I just wanted to point out that editline does
use the same terminal capability libraries (termcap/terminfo) as
readline, so there's no fundamental reason this couldn't be
implemented portably other than (I'm guessing) the lack of motivation
or time from its authors/contributors.

-Judah
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

Re: ghci-haskeline (was: Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 - EditLine / terminal incompatibility?)

[Christos Chryssochoidis]

Hello,

2008/11/21 John O'Donnell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Simon says...
>
>> Could we reduce GHC's surface area by just using haskeline and dumping
>> readline/editline support altogether?
>
> I'm in favor of doing this.  For portability and consistency, it's better
> to have just one version that is unencumbered by these license issues,
> as long as it works on the main platforms (including Macintosh - has that
> been tested?).

It works very well on my Mac. Both tab completion of quoted filenames
in Haskell expressions and of unicode identifiers works well. (It
doesn't complete non-latin file names, but I can live with that.)

I've also noticed that with haskeline one can type in ghci non-latin
characters, as was the case before, with readline, but not anymore
with editline.

Hope it helps

C.Chryssochoidis

> If ghc tries to support both readline and editline, along
> with haskeline, applications written in Haskell will have different
> behaviours
> depending on the combination (platform,line-editor).  Better just to
> simplify.
>
> John O'Donnell
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Simon
> Peyton-Jones
> Sent: Fri 2008-11-21 10:39
> To: Simon Marlow; Judah Jacobson
> Cc: glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
> Subject: RE: ghci-haskeline (was: Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 -
> EditLine / terminal incompatibility?)
>
> | > I've actually been experimenting with something similar:
> | >
> | > darcs get http://code.haskell.org/~judah/ghci-haskeline/
> 
> | >
> | > Current benefits over the readline/editline versions:
> | > - Works on Windows
> |
> | I can attest to that.  Nice going Judah!
> |
> | $ cabal update
> | $ darcs get http://code.haskell.org/~judah/ghci-haskeline/
> | $ cd ghci-haskeline
> | $ cabal install
> |
> | and I have a GHCi on Windows that can do completion, history search, and
> | exits when I hit ^D.  That's made my day.
>
> If I had £1 for every email I've seen in the last decade about
> platform-related or license-related problems with readline and now editline,
> I'd be rich man.  Super rich.
>
> Could we reduce GHC's surface area by just using haskeline and dumping
> readline/editline support altogether? Yes that might reduce functionality
> slightly -- readline/editline are complicated for good reasons. But it's
> increase functionality in other ways (as Judah says), and by giving us one
> piece of software that we understand, and can distribute with GHC, it might
> remove a whole class of problems.
>
> Simon
> ___
> Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
> Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
>
>
> ___
> Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
> Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
>
>
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

RE: ghci-haskeline (was: Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 - EditLine / terminal incompatibility?)

[John O'Donnell]

Simon says...

> Could we reduce GHC's surface area by just using haskeline and dumping
> readline/editline support altogether?

I'm in favor of doing this.  For portability and consistency, it's better
to have just one version that is unencumbered by these license issues,
as long as it works on the main platforms (including Macintosh - has that
been tested?).  If ghc tries to support both readline and editline, along
with haskeline, applications written in Haskell will have different behaviours
depending on the combination (platform,line-editor).  Better just to simplify.

John O'Donnell 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Simon Peyton-Jones
Sent: Fri 2008-11-21 10:39
To: Simon Marlow; Judah Jacobson
Cc: glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
Subject: RE: ghci-haskeline (was: Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 - EditLine / 
terminal incompatibility?)
 
| > I've actually been experimenting with something similar:
| >
| > darcs get http://code.haskell.org/~judah/ghci-haskeline/

| >
| > Current benefits over the readline/editline versions:
| > - Works on Windows
|
| I can attest to that.  Nice going Judah!
|
| $ cabal update
| $ darcs get http://code.haskell.org/~judah/ghci-haskeline/
| $ cd ghci-haskeline
| $ cabal install
|
| and I have a GHCi on Windows that can do completion, history search, and
| exits when I hit ^D.  That's made my day.

If I had £1 for every email I've seen in the last decade about platform-related 
or license-related problems with readline and now editline, I'd be rich man.  
Super rich.

Could we reduce GHC's surface area by just using haskeline and dumping 
readline/editline support altogether? Yes that might reduce functionality 
slightly -- readline/editline are complicated for good reasons. But it's 
increase functionality in other ways (as Judah says), and by giving us one 
piece of software that we understand, and can distribute with GHC, it might 
remove a whole class of problems.

Simon
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 - EditLine / terminal incompatibility?

[Simon Marlow]

Duncan Coutts wrote:

On Thu, 2008-11-20 at 12:51 +, Simon Marlow wrote:

Duncan Coutts wrote:



What I really think is that we should add back optional readline
support. People building closed source ghc binaries would not use it but
linux distros could enable it and provide a better "out of the box"
experience. As I understand it there would be no licencing problems with
that approach.
One downside I can see is that it gives us an extra configuration to test 
and maintain.  It's hard enough keeping one line-editing binding working, 
let alone two!


It's true that editline seems to have brought a bunch of headaches with it, 
though.  Perhaps Haskelline is the way to go in the future.


My selfish suggestion is that we maintain the readline configuration and
let the people who originally wanted editline support do the work to
maintain that configuration. I get the feeling they don't care about if
it works well, just that it's got the license they want (which is a
perfectly reasonable position).


I propose we do this:

 * extract the GHCi UI from the GHC package, put it in the ghc-bin package
   (maybe we should rename this package to ghc-main or something).  This
   removes the editline and bytestring (for now) dependencies from the GHC
   package.

 * Move to Haskeline for the default build.  We have to bring in terminfo
   and utf8-string as bootlibs.  This gives us line-editing on Windows,
   and removes problematic external C library dependencies.

 * Make it possible to compile the ghc-bin package against readline.
   Upload ghc-bin to Hackage, so people can say
  cabal install ghc-bin -f readline
   and get a GHCi built against readline if they want.  Oops - except that
   this would mean that the ghc-main package has a variant license.  So
   maybe we have to have a separate ghc-readline package?

Ok?

Cheers,
Simon
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 - EditLine / terminal incompatibility?

[Duncan Coutts]

On Fri, 2008-11-21 at 11:59 +0100, Philip K.F. Hölzenspies wrote:
> On Friday 21 November 2008 10:49:47 Jules Bean wrote:

> > Something must be very very broken : surely it is not expected behaviour
> > for editline to need configuration in this way?
> 
> One can call it broken, another will say users should settle for the default 
> behaviour. Neither readline, nor editline *need* configuration this way, 
> because they do come with sensible defaults.

But that's just it. It seems that readline does come with sensible
defaults and editline does not. For example xterm is not a rare kind of
terminal (basically every terminal in use claims to be xterm) and yet
delete does not work with it out-of-the-box with editline. That is
broken.

[To add insult to injury, even when I look up the escape sequence for
delete using the cat/telnet trick, I still cannot configure editline to
recognise it.]

> However, some people want custom behaviour and they'll have to figure
> out how stuff works for their machine.

That's a different matter. Most people have never configured anything
custom and just want the common basics to work. In fact most linux users
have never looked at a readline man page and don't know what an escape
sequence is. It has to work right for the users who do not know that it
is possible to configure, otherwise they will call it broken.

Duncan

___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 - EditLine / terminal incompatibility?

[Jules Bean]

Philip K.F. Hölzenspies wrote:

On Friday 21 November 2008 10:49:47 Jules Bean wrote:

Philip Hölzenspies wrote:

Also, there are no de facto escape sequences, because special keys (like
function and arrow keys) have different sequences on different
terminals. A useful tip that may be useful to include in the wiki is an
easy trick that will help you find out your terminals escape sequences.
I usually just like to start an application that has no editline or
readline capabilities and press the keys. Telnet is one of my favorite
applications for this purpose.

But this is abhorrent.

The whole point of the existence of termcap and libraries which build
upon it (ncurses, readline, editline, etc) is so that individual users
do not have to work out what the escape sequences produced by their
terminal are.

Something must be very very broken : surely it is not expected behaviour
for editline to need configuration in this way?


One can call it broken, another will say users should settle for the default 
behaviour. Neither readline, nor editline *need* configuration this way, 
because they do come with sensible defaults. However, some people want custom 
behaviour and they'll have to figure out how stuff works for their machine.


And suppose I log on from another machine with a different TERM setting? 
or just use a different terminal program?


This is broken.
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 - EditLine / terminal incompatibility?

[Philip K.F. Hölzenspies]

On Friday 21 November 2008 10:49:47 Jules Bean wrote:
> Philip Hölzenspies wrote:
> > Also, there are no de facto escape sequences, because special keys (like
> > function and arrow keys) have different sequences on different
> > terminals. A useful tip that may be useful to include in the wiki is an
> > easy trick that will help you find out your terminals escape sequences.
> > I usually just like to start an application that has no editline or
> > readline capabilities and press the keys. Telnet is one of my favorite
> > applications for this purpose.
>
> But this is abhorrent.
>
> The whole point of the existence of termcap and libraries which build
> upon it (ncurses, readline, editline, etc) is so that individual users
> do not have to work out what the escape sequences produced by their
> terminal are.
>
> Something must be very very broken : surely it is not expected behaviour
> for editline to need configuration in this way?

One can call it broken, another will say users should settle for the default 
behaviour. Neither readline, nor editline *need* configuration this way, 
because they do come with sensible defaults. However, some people want custom 
behaviour and they'll have to figure out how stuff works for their machine.

I think a sensible purpose of a Wiki is to help people get some of the more 
tricky business done. Also, I don't see what is wrong with typing in terms of 
escape sequences per se, but for those that have something against it; 
there's bound to be some program somewhere that will allow you to type  
instead of ^[[A. The upside of the telnet tip, is that it works on many *NIXs 
and their derivatives. It even works on OSX, so it's a 
one-size-fits-(almost)-all tip.

Philip
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

RE: ghci-haskeline (was: Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 - EditLine / terminal incompatibility?)

[Simon Peyton-Jones]

| > I've actually been experimenting with something similar:
| >
| > darcs get http://code.haskell.org/~judah/ghci-haskeline/

| >
| > Current benefits over the readline/editline versions:
| > - Works on Windows
|
| I can attest to that.  Nice going Judah!
|
| $ cabal update
| $ darcs get http://code.haskell.org/~judah/ghci-haskeline/
| $ cd ghci-haskeline
| $ cabal install
|
| and I have a GHCi on Windows that can do completion, history search, and
| exits when I hit ^D.  That's made my day.

If I had £1 for every email I've seen in the last decade about platform-related 
or license-related problems with readline and now editline, I'd be rich man.  
Super rich.

Could we reduce GHC's surface area by just using haskeline and dumping 
readline/editline support altogether? Yes that might reduce functionality 
slightly -- readline/editline are complicated for good reasons. But it's 
increase functionality in other ways (as Judah says), and by giving us one 
piece of software that we understand, and can distribute with GHC, it might 
remove a whole class of problems.

Simon
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

Re: ghci-haskeline (was: Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 - EditLine / terminal incompatibility?)

[Simon Marlow]

Judah Jacobson wrote:

On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 7:16 AM, Ian Lynagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Although another option would be to make GHCi a separate (GPL) frontend
to the (BSD) GHC API. The only downside is that (with static linking) we
have another large binary. Another upside is that other GHC API users
don't get an editline dependency.


I've actually been experimenting with something similar:

darcs get http://code.haskell.org/~judah/ghci-haskeline/

If you have ghc-6.10.1, 'cabal install'ing inside that repo will give
you a version of ghci which uses Haskeline as its backend.

Basically, I copied 4 modules from the GHC source tree (GhciMonad,
InteractiveUI, GhciTags and Main) and modifed them to use Haskeline;
the rest of GHC is obtained through the API.

Current benefits over the readline/editline versions:
- Works on Windows


I can attest to that.  Nice going Judah!

$ cabal update
$ darcs get http://code.haskell.org/~judah/ghci-haskeline/
$ cd ghci-haskeline
$ cabal install

and I have a GHCi on Windows that can do completion, history search, and 
exits when I hit ^D.  That's made my day.


BTW, your LICENSE file looks like it was copied from the GHC source tree, 
it still has various references to GHC and the University of Glasgow.


Cheers,
Simon
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 - EditLine / terminal incompatibility?

[Jules Bean]

Philip Hölzenspies wrote:

On Nov 19, 2008, at 6:25 PM, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
Would it be worth adding this hard-won lore somewhere on a Wiki where 
it can be found later?


Dear Simon, all,

I don't think logging a specific option on the Wiki is particularly 
useful (maybe you would have a default editrc file), because, of course, 
everybody has their own particular wishes. For example, aside from the 
word-jumping Duncan suggested, I alway use zsh-like history searching, 
so I like:


bind "^[[A" ed-search-prev-history
bind "^[[B" ed-search-next-history

Also, there are no de facto escape sequences, because special keys (like 
function and arrow keys) have different sequences on different 
terminals. A useful tip that may be useful to include in the wiki is an 
easy trick that will help you find out your terminals escape sequences. 
I usually just like to start an application that has no editline or 
readline capabilities and press the keys. Telnet is one of my favorite 
applications for this purpose.


But this is abhorrent.

The whole point of the existence of termcap and libraries which build 
upon it (ncurses, readline, editline, etc) is so that individual users 
do not have to work out what the escape sequences produced by their 
terminal are.


Something must be very very broken : surely it is not expected behaviour 
for editline to need configuration in this way?


Jules
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

ghci-haskeline (was: Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 - EditLine / terminal incompatibility?)

[Judah Jacobson]

On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 7:16 AM, Ian Lynagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Although another option would be to make GHCi a separate (GPL) frontend
> to the (BSD) GHC API. The only downside is that (with static linking) we
> have another large binary. Another upside is that other GHC API users
> don't get an editline dependency.

I've actually been experimenting with something similar:

darcs get http://code.haskell.org/~judah/ghci-haskeline/

If you have ghc-6.10.1, 'cabal install'ing inside that repo will give
you a version of ghci which uses Haskeline as its backend.

Basically, I copied 4 modules from the GHC source tree (GhciMonad,
InteractiveUI, GhciTags and Main) and modifed them to use Haskeline;
the rest of GHC is obtained through the API.

Current benefits over the readline/editline versions:
- Works on Windows
- Tab completion of quoted filenames within Haskell expressions
- Tab completion of Unicode identifiers (trac #2058)
- Internally, eliminates the need for some GLOBAL_VARs

The only real regression I'm aware of is that Haskeline doesn't yet
provide a way to "bind" custom key commands as in an inputrc or editrc
file.  The recent discussion has indicated how important that feature
is for some users, so it's next on my TODO list.

-Judah
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 - EditLine / terminal incompatibility?

[Ian Lynagh]

On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 06:43:49PM +, Duncan Coutts wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-11-20 at 15:16 +, Ian Lynagh wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 01:52:12PM +, Duncan Coutts wrote:
> > > 
> > > My selfish suggestion is that we maintain the readline configuration and
> > > let the people who originally wanted editline support do the work to
> > > maintain that configuration.
> > 
> > Those people are GHC HQ: readline is GPL (not LGPL), so if GHC wants to
> > be BSD then it can't use it.
> 
> It's not quite that simple. GHC HQ does not ship readline, it's just
> shipping BSD code. If I link ghc against readline then the result must
> be distributed in compliance with the GPL, but that's ok, all linux
> distros do that. When GHC HQ ship binaries they can configure it to use
> editline.

OK, so I should have said "... it can't use it exclusively". But it's
still GHC HQ that needs editline support (or a switch to haskeline, or
splitting ghci off, or some other solution. But just reverting to
readline-only won't work).


Thanks
Ian

___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 - EditLine / terminal incompatibility?

[Duncan Coutts]

On Thu, 2008-11-20 at 15:16 +, Ian Lynagh wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 01:52:12PM +, Duncan Coutts wrote:
> > 
> > My selfish suggestion is that we maintain the readline configuration and
> > let the people who originally wanted editline support do the work to
> > maintain that configuration.
> 
> Those people are GHC HQ: readline is GPL (not LGPL), so if GHC wants to
> be BSD then it can't use it.

It's not quite that simple. GHC HQ does not ship readline, it's just
shipping BSD code. If I link ghc against readline then the result must
be distributed in compliance with the GPL, but that's ok, all linux
distros do that. When GHC HQ ship binaries they can configure it to use
editline.

If someone (even GHC HQ) ships BSD code and GPL code linked together
then that doesn't mean that suddenly the BSD code has to be re-licensed,
it just means the overall result has to be shipped in a way that is
compliant with the GPL (ie providing source and providing a copy of the
GPL for the GPL components). I presume this already happens in the
windows installer that includes gcc etc.

> Although another option would be to make GHCi a separate (GPL) frontend
> to the (BSD) GHC API. The only downside is that (with static linking) we
> have another large binary. Another upside is that other GHC API users
> don't get an editline dependency.

Yes, independently of licence issues there's no need for the ghc api
package to depend on any line editor.

Duncan

___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 - EditLine / terminal incompatibility?

[Ian Lynagh]

On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 01:52:12PM +, Duncan Coutts wrote:
> 
> My selfish suggestion is that we maintain the readline configuration and
> let the people who originally wanted editline support do the work to
> maintain that configuration.

Those people are GHC HQ: readline is GPL (not LGPL), so if GHC wants to
be BSD then it can't use it.

Although another option would be to make GHCi a separate (GPL) frontend
to the (BSD) GHC API. The only downside is that (with static linking) we
have another large binary. Another upside is that other GHC API users
don't get an editline dependency.


Thanks
Ian

___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 - EditLine / terminal incompatibility?

[Duncan Coutts]

On Thu, 2008-11-20 at 12:51 +, Simon Marlow wrote:
> Duncan Coutts wrote:

> > What I really think is that we should add back optional readline
> > support. People building closed source ghc binaries would not use it but
> > linux distros could enable it and provide a better "out of the box"
> > experience. As I understand it there would be no licencing problems with
> > that approach.
> 
> One downside I can see is that it gives us an extra configuration to test 
> and maintain.  It's hard enough keeping one line-editing binding working, 
> let alone two!
> 
> It's true that editline seems to have brought a bunch of headaches with it, 
> though.  Perhaps Haskelline is the way to go in the future.

My selfish suggestion is that we maintain the readline configuration and
let the people who originally wanted editline support do the work to
maintain that configuration. I get the feeling they don't care about if
it works well, just that it's got the license they want (which is a
perfectly reasonable position).

Duncan

___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 - EditLine / terminal incompatibility?

[Simon Marlow]

Duncan Coutts wrote:

On Wed, 2008-11-19 at 20:45 +0100, Philip Hölzenspies wrote:

On Nov 19, 2008, at 6:25 PM, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
Would it be worth adding this hard-won lore somewhere on a Wiki  
where it can be found later?

Dear Simon, all,

I don't think logging a specific option on the Wiki is particularly  
useful (maybe you would have a default editrc file), because, of  
course, everybody has their own particular wishes.


I don't have any particular wishes. I just want it to "work" where
"work" means does what the rest of my system does. I never configured
readline, it came with sensible defaults (possibly set by my linux
system distributor).

What I really think is that we should add back optional readline
support. People building closed source ghc binaries would not use it but
linux distros could enable it and provide a better "out of the box"
experience. As I understand it there would be no licencing problems with
that approach.


One downside I can see is that it gives us an extra configuration to test 
and maintain.  It's hard enough keeping one line-editing binding working, 
let alone two!


It's true that editline seems to have brought a bunch of headaches with it, 
though.  Perhaps Haskelline is the way to go in the future.


Cheers,
Simon
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 - EditLine / terminal incompatibility?

[Duncan Coutts]

On Wed, 2008-11-19 at 20:45 +0100, Philip Hölzenspies wrote:
> On Nov 19, 2008, at 6:25 PM, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
> > Would it be worth adding this hard-won lore somewhere on a Wiki  
> > where it can be found later?
> 
> Dear Simon, all,
> 
> I don't think logging a specific option on the Wiki is particularly  
> useful (maybe you would have a default editrc file), because, of  
> course, everybody has their own particular wishes.

I don't have any particular wishes. I just want it to "work" where
"work" means does what the rest of my system does. I never configured
readline, it came with sensible defaults (possibly set by my linux
system distributor).

What I really think is that we should add back optional readline
support. People building closed source ghc binaries would not use it but
linux distros could enable it and provide a better "out of the box"
experience. As I understand it there would be no licencing problems with
that approach.

Duncan

___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 - EditLine / terminal incompatibility?

[Simon Marlow]

Philip Hölzenspies wrote:

Something that I would personally very much enjoy is a clear and 
unmistakable warning from configure when editline is not found. After 
installing libedit-devel (my ghci-6.10.1 finally has comfortable editing 
now), I checked config.log; there's not even a mention of libedit 
capabilities. Maybe a general summary at the end of configure of all the 
optional capabilities that were or were not configured. As an 
inspiration, look at gtk2hs' configure output.


Good idea - I've added it to the list of things to do in the new build system.

Cheers,
Simon
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 - EditLine / terminal incompatibility?

[Philip Hölzenspies]

On Nov 19, 2008, at 6:25 PM, Simon Peyton-Jones wrote:
Would it be worth adding this hard-won lore somewhere on a Wiki  
where it can be found later?


Dear Simon, all,

I don't think logging a specific option on the Wiki is particularly  
useful (maybe you would have a default editrc file), because, of  
course, everybody has their own particular wishes. For example, aside  
from the word-jumping Duncan suggested, I alway use zsh-like history  
searching, so I like:


bind "^[[A" ed-search-prev-history
bind "^[[B" ed-search-next-history

Also, there are no de facto escape sequences, because special keys  
(like function and arrow keys) have different sequences on different  
terminals. A useful tip that may be useful to include in the wiki is  
an easy trick that will help you find out your terminals escape  
sequences. I usually just like to start an application that has no  
editline or readline capabilities and press the keys. Telnet is one of  
my favorite applications for this purpose.


Something that I would personally very much enjoy is a clear and  
unmistakable warning from configure when editline is not found. After  
installing libedit-devel (my ghci-6.10.1 finally has comfortable  
editing now), I checked config.log; there's not even a mention of  
libedit capabilities. Maybe a general summary at the end of configure  
of all the optional capabilities that were or were not configured. As  
an inspiration, look at gtk2hs' configure output.


Regards,
Philip
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

RE: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 - EditLine / terminal incompatibility?

[Simon Peyton-Jones]

Would it be worth adding this hard-won lore somewhere on a Wiki where it can be 
found later?

Simon

| -Original Message-
| From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:glasgow-haskell-users-
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Duncan Coutts
| Sent: 07 November 2008 18:09
| To: GHC-users list
| Cc: Philip K.F. Hölzenspies
| Subject: Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 - EditLine / terminal 
incompatibility?
|
| On Fri, 2008-11-07 at 09:14 -0800, Judah Jacobson wrote:
| > On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 4:36 AM, Duncan Coutts
| > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| > >
| > > I get some working and some non-working. Eg backspace, del, home, end
| > > work, but the ctl-left/ctl-right to jump words does not.
| > >
| > > Does anyone know how libedit is supposed to be configured? readline
| > > uses /etc/inputrc but libedit either does not or doesn't understand all
| > > of it.
| > >
| > > /me wonders if it was really necessary to switch from readline
| > >
| > > Duncan
| >
| > You can configure libedit with a ~/.editrc file.
| >
| > http://www.manpagez.com/man/5/editrc/
|
| Thanks Judah.
|
| To save everyone else having to read the man page and working out
| through trial and error what the key escape codes are, add the following
| to your ~/.editrc file.
|
| # mappings for Ctrl-left-arrow and Ctrl-right-arrow for word moving
| bind "\e[1;5D" vi-prev-word
| bind "\e[1;5C" vi-next-word
|
| (though from reading the readline /etc/inputrc it suggests that "\e[5C"
| and "\e[5D" might be right on some systems)
|
| It's unfortunate that editline does not seem to support any
| global /etc/editrc file which would enable distros to make it do the
| right thing by default like they do for readline.
|
| Duncan
|
| ___
| Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
| Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
| http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 - EditLine / terminal incompatibility?

[Ian Lynagh]

On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 10:39:42AM -0800, Judah Jacobson wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 11:03 AM, Don Stewart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > judah.jacobson:
> >> >
> >> > Note that haskeline has a lot of dependencies and requires
> >> > TemplateHaskell and many other language extensions.
> >>
> >> I'm also somewhat wary of switching to haskeline in ghc-6.10.  I think
> >> these issues could be resolved in time for 6.12, though:
> >
> > haskeline needs /way/ too many extensions for a simple console reader...
> 
> Well, even though the external API of a line reader may look simple,
> under the hood there can be a lot going on

I don't think extensions are an issue for ghci, except for TH (which you
say can be replaced). They doesn't even cause extra problems for
bootstrapping with other Haskell impls, as it's stage >= 2 only.

Extra package dependencies are a pain, but aren't the end of the world.

The big thing, in my opinion, is portability - not in the sense of the
code compiling, but in the sense of "will the arrow keys Just Work if I
run ghci in, say, an rxvt on a Solaris machine"? Although it seems like
editline fails this anyway, even for the common case of xterm/Linux.

Haskell code would also cause fewer build system headaches than linking
to a C library.


Thanks
Ian

___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 - EditLine / terminal incompatibility?

[Judah Jacobson]

On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 11:03 AM, Don Stewart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> judah.jacobson:
>> >
>> > Note that haskeline has a lot of dependencies and requires
>> > TemplateHaskell and many other language extensions.
>>
>> I'm also somewhat wary of switching to haskeline in ghc-6.10.  I think
>> these issues could be resolved in time for 6.12, though:
>
> haskeline needs /way/ too many extensions for a simple console reader...

Well, even though the external API of a line reader may look simple,
under the hood there can be a lot going on, both in the user interface
(e.g. user preferences, multiple key bindings, history recall/search,
undo/redo, tab completion) and backend (e.g. redraw efficiently,
cross-platform compatibility).

Using a stack of monad transformers to encapsulate the state and
settings helped make the code much more modular, understandable and
concise, but also required several type extensions to work the way I
wanted (MultiParamTypeClasses, OverlappingInstances, FlexibleContexts,
etc.).  I felt the tradeoff was worth it when originally writing the
code, but patches or suggestions are, of course, welcome :-)

(Incidentally, the .cabal file in haskeline-3.2 erroneously lists
GADTs and FunDeps which are not actually required; those extensions
will be removed for the next release.)

Best,
-Judah
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 - EditLine / terminal incompatibility?

[Don Stewart]

judah.jacobson:
> On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 6:42 AM, Duncan Coutts
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Sun, 2008-11-09 at 01:49 +, Ian Lynagh wrote:
> >> On Sat, Nov 08, 2008 at 12:33:57PM -0800, Judah Jacobson wrote:
> >> >
> >> > bind "\e[3~" ed-delete-next-char
> >>
> >> It's a shame this doesn't just work out of the box in an xterm, on
> >> Debian at least. Perhaps we should consider switching to haskeline? Do
> >> we know anything about how portable and complete that is?
> >
> > If we're considering that I think we should consider bringing back
> > readline as an option and let the people who have problems with gpl code
> > configure in editline support instead.
> >
> > Note that haskeline has a lot of dependencies and requires
> > TemplateHaskell and many other language extensions.
> 
> I'm also somewhat wary of switching to haskeline in ghc-6.10.  I think
> these issues could be resolved in time for 6.12, though:

haskeline needs /way/ too many extensions for a simple console reader...
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 - EditLine / terminal incompatibility?

[Judah Jacobson]

On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 6:42 AM, Duncan Coutts
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, 2008-11-09 at 01:49 +, Ian Lynagh wrote:
>> On Sat, Nov 08, 2008 at 12:33:57PM -0800, Judah Jacobson wrote:
>> >
>> > bind "\e[3~" ed-delete-next-char
>>
>> It's a shame this doesn't just work out of the box in an xterm, on
>> Debian at least. Perhaps we should consider switching to haskeline? Do
>> we know anything about how portable and complete that is?
>
> If we're considering that I think we should consider bringing back
> readline as an option and let the people who have problems with gpl code
> configure in editline support instead.
>
> Note that haskeline has a lot of dependencies and requires
> TemplateHaskell and many other language extensions.

I'm also somewhat wary of switching to haskeline in ghc-6.10.  I think
these issues could be resolved in time for 6.12, though:

1) Completeness: IMHO as the package author, haskeline already has
enough features and cross-platform compatibility to warrant its use by
ghci.  (The full feature-list is at http://trac.haskell.org/haskeline/
.)

2) Language extensions: Since ghci is only ever built in stage 2 (and
never by the bootstrapping compiler), the language extensions should
not be an issue.  The only exception is TemplateHaskell, as Duncan
mentioned, since it cannot be used by a stage 1 compiler.  But TH is
limited to one function in one module and could be easily replaced
either by hard-coding the generated code or by using syb.  (Some other
extensions may also no longer be necessary: I haven't checked
recently).

3) Dependencies: Outside of ghc's bootlibs, haskeline depends on mtl
and stm (which are extralibs), terminfo (which is only used on POSIX),
and utf8-string.

- utf8-string should not be needed when unicode text I/O is
implemented for ghc-6.12, as mentioned in
http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/Status/October08

- terminfo is a lightweight binding to a foreign library (ncurses,
really) and could either be added to the bootlibs (my preference) or
folded into the haskeline package.

- stm: I don't see why this couldn't also be a bootlib, although if
necessary I can investigate using MVar-based concurrency instead.

- mtl: haskeline uses MonadTrans and MonadIO from that package, which
ghc reimplements internally.  I'm not sure of the right thing to do
here.


-Judah
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 - EditLine / terminal incompatibility?

[Duncan Coutts]

On Sun, 2008-11-09 at 01:49 +, Ian Lynagh wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 08, 2008 at 12:33:57PM -0800, Judah Jacobson wrote:
> > 
> > bind "\e[3~" ed-delete-next-char
> 
> It's a shame this doesn't just work out of the box in an xterm, on
> Debian at least. Perhaps we should consider switching to haskeline? Do
> we know anything about how portable and complete that is?

If we're considering that I think we should consider bringing back
readline as an option and let the people who have problems with gpl code
configure in editline support instead.

Note that haskeline has a lot of dependencies and requires
TemplateHaskell and many other language extensions.

Duncan

___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 - EditLine / terminal incompatibility?

[Brandon S. Allbery KF8NH]

On 2008 Nov 8, at 22:13, Rohan Drape wrote:

Emacs sends text to processes in packets of at most 255 characters.
In between these ghci now gets a ^D character sequence inserted into
the text.  This did not happen previously (ie. with 6.8.2).


This sounds like a bug:  either editline or ghci assumes that when it  
successfully reads data which lacks a line terminator than it has seen  
an EOF, so inserts a ^D.  But if it received the data at the maximum  
tty buffer size (255) then there is no trigger character.


(This is easy enough to work around:  special-case reads of length  
255.  But in reality, this means something is Doing It Wrong.)


--
brandon s. allbery [solaris,freebsd,perl,pugs,haskell] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
system administrator [openafs,heimdal,too many hats] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
electrical and computer engineering, carnegie mellon universityKF8NH


___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 - EditLine / terminal incompatibility?

[Rohan Drape]

On 2008-11-09, Reiner Pope <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm not sure if this is Emacs' fault, but when I run GHCi through
> Emacs, entered text is printed to stdout or stderr immediately after
> Enter is pressed; when this is done after a file is loaded, "^J" is
> appended. 

Also here, and there is a further problem with long lines.  

Emacs sends text to processes in packets of at most 255 characters.
In between these ghci now gets a ^D character sequence inserted into
the text.  This did not happen previously (ie. with 6.8.2).

I've edited the emacs mode I use to split long strings into packets
before requesting emacs sends them, which has 'solved' the problem
here.  However it seems unlikely that emacs is doing anything too odd?

Regards,
Rohan

(I doubt this affects many people, the emacs mode I use collapses a
region written without layout into a single long line and sends that
to ghci for evaluation.)

___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 - EditLine / terminal incompatibility?

[Reiner Pope]

On Sun, Nov 9, 2008 at 12:53 PM, Ian Lynagh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 09, 2008 at 01:49:43AM +, Ian Lynagh wrote:
>> On Sat, Nov 08, 2008 at 12:33:57PM -0800, Judah Jacobson wrote:
>> >
>> > bind "\e[3~" ed-delete-next-char
>>
>> It's a shame this doesn't just work out of the box in an xterm, on
>
> Oh, the other thing I meant to say is that it seems to behaves
> unexpectedly too. If I type "abc" and press delete, then the "c" is
> deleted and the cursor is left on (on, not after) the "b". I'd expect
> the "c" to remain, and the cursor to stay after the "c".
>
>
> Thanks
> Ian
>
> ___
> Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
> Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
>

Hi,

I'm not sure if this is Emacs' fault, but when I run GHCi through
Emacs, entered text is printed to stdout or stderr immediately after
Enter is pressed; when this is done after a file is loaded, "^J" is
appended. For example

>GHCi, version 6.10.1: http://www.haskell.org/ghc/  :? for help
>Loading package ghc-prim ... linking ... done.
>Loading package integer ... linking ... done.
>Loading package base ... linking ... done.
>Prelude> :t id
>:t id
>id :: a -> a
>Prelude> :l Pair.hs
>:l Pair.hs
>[1 of 1] Compiling Pair ( Pair.hs, interpreted )
>Ok, modules loaded: Pair.
>*Pair> :t id
>:t id^Jid :: a -> a
>*Pair>

Note that this happens even without haskell-mode, using just M-x shell.

I'm using Ubuntu 8.10, GHC 6.10.1. I symlinked libedit.so.0 to
libedit.so.2 as Simon Marlow suggested. It works fine in
gnome-terminal, but not in Emacs.

Cheers,
Reiner
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 - EditLine / terminal incompatibility?

[Ian Lynagh]

On Sun, Nov 09, 2008 at 01:49:43AM +, Ian Lynagh wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 08, 2008 at 12:33:57PM -0800, Judah Jacobson wrote:
> > 
> > bind "\e[3~" ed-delete-next-char
> 
> It's a shame this doesn't just work out of the box in an xterm, on

Oh, the other thing I meant to say is that it seems to behaves
unexpectedly too. If I type "abc" and press delete, then the "c" is
deleted and the cursor is left on (on, not after) the "b". I'd expect
the "c" to remain, and the cursor to stay after the "c".


Thanks
Ian

___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 - EditLine / terminal incompatibility?

[Ian Lynagh]

On Sat, Nov 08, 2008 at 12:33:57PM -0800, Judah Jacobson wrote:
> 
> bind "\e[3~" ed-delete-next-char

It's a shame this doesn't just work out of the box in an xterm, on
Debian at least. Perhaps we should consider switching to haskeline? Do
we know anything about how portable and complete that is?


Thanks
Ian

___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 - EditLine / terminal incompatibility?

[Alexander Dunlap]

On Sat, Nov 8, 2008 at 12:33 PM, Judah Jacobson
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 8:38 PM, Alexander Dunlap
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 3:13 AM, Philip K.F. Hölzenspies
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I apologize if this is off-topic, but I'm having a similar (but
>> distinct) problem: editline thinks that my delete key is a tilde key.
>> When I type , it inserts a tilde. The tilde then acts
>> completely like a tilde (i.e. GHCi interprets it as a tilde). I have
>> been unable to find an answer by googling. Does anyone else have/know
>> how to fix this problem?
>
> First, just to make sure: do the arrow keys work or is all editing
> functionality broken?  If it's the latter, then ghc probably wasn't
> built with libedit and you need the libedit-devel package.
>
> Assuming that's not the issue, and you don't get the same problem with
> readline-based programs, then it sounds like editline doesn't know
> about the key binding for DELETE on your system.  The simplest fix is
> to edit the ~/.editrc file.  For example:
>
> Running "ghc -e getLine", then pressing DELETE followed by RETURN, I see:
>
> $ ghc -e getLine
> ^[[3~
> "\ESC[3~"
>
> This tells me the key sequence for the DELETE key in my terminal, so I
> add the following line to my ~/.editrc file
> (http://www.manpagez.com/man/5/editrc/):
>
> bind "\e[3~" ed-delete-next-char
>
>
> Hope that helps,
> -Judah
>

Your latter instructions were exactly what I needed. Thank you very much!

Alex
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 - EditLine / terminal incompatibility?

[Judah Jacobson]

On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 8:38 PM, Alexander Dunlap
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 3:13 AM, Philip K.F. Hölzenspies
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I apologize if this is off-topic, but I'm having a similar (but
> distinct) problem: editline thinks that my delete key is a tilde key.
> When I type , it inserts a tilde. The tilde then acts
> completely like a tilde (i.e. GHCi interprets it as a tilde). I have
> been unable to find an answer by googling. Does anyone else have/know
> how to fix this problem?

First, just to make sure: do the arrow keys work or is all editing
functionality broken?  If it's the latter, then ghc probably wasn't
built with libedit and you need the libedit-devel package.

Assuming that's not the issue, and you don't get the same problem with
readline-based programs, then it sounds like editline doesn't know
about the key binding for DELETE on your system.  The simplest fix is
to edit the ~/.editrc file.  For example:

Running "ghc -e getLine", then pressing DELETE followed by RETURN, I see:

$ ghc -e getLine
^[[3~
"\ESC[3~"

This tells me the key sequence for the DELETE key in my terminal, so I
add the following line to my ~/.editrc file
(http://www.manpagez.com/man/5/editrc/):

bind "\e[3~" ed-delete-next-char


Hope that helps,
-Judah
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 - EditLine / terminal incompatibility?

[Ian Lynagh]

Hi Philip,

On Fri, Nov 07, 2008 at 12:13:04PM +0100, Philip K.F. Hölzenspies wrote:
> 
> After the announcement, I downloaded and installed the final release of 
> 6.10.1. At some prior stage, I used the RC1 release, which had the same bug, 
> but I had generally assumed it to be an RC-phenomenon.

For future reference, the RCs are built in exactly the same way as the
releases. So if there's a bug of any kind in an RC, and it's not
reported, then the chances are it'll be in the release too.


Thanks
Ian

___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 - EditLine / terminal incompatibility?

[Alexander Dunlap]

On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 3:13 AM, Philip K.F. Hölzenspies
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dear Ian, all,
>
> After the announcement, I downloaded and installed the final release of
> 6.10.1. At some prior stage, I used the RC1 release, which had the same bug,
> but I had generally assumed it to be an RC-phenomenon. Which bug? Well...
>
> It seems editline has some incompatibility with my terminal. Maybe, I should
> configure something differently, but any and all of the control characters I
> type and work for all readline based (and all custom line-readers I have come
> across), but not for the new ghci. Most annoying is the fact that backspace
> doesn't work (instead, the control sequence ^? is printed and pressing enter
> results in "lexical error at character '\DEL'"). However, arrow keys (left
> ^[[D, up ^[[A, right ^[[C and down ^[[B) and common Ctrl+_ combinations (^d,
> ^e, ^a) also give similar errors. It is striking that the lexer does
> recognize them as the correct characters (printed error messages doe say
> \DEL, \EOT, \ENQ, etc).
>
> I'm using xterm (X.Org 6.8.99.903(229)) on an OpenSuSE 10.3 system and the
> default termcap settings. Any clues? Is this bug known?
>
> Regards,
> Philip
> ___
> Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
> Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
>

Hi all,

I apologize if this is off-topic, but I'm having a similar (but
distinct) problem: editline thinks that my delete key is a tilde key.
When I type , it inserts a tilde. The tilde then acts
completely like a tilde (i.e. GHCi interprets it as a tilde). I have
been unable to find an answer by googling. Does anyone else have/know
how to fix this problem?

Thanks,
Alex
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 - EditLine / terminal incompatibility?

[Don Stewart]

duncan.coutts:
> On Fri, 2008-11-07 at 13:02 -0800, Don Stewart wrote:
> 
> > > Does anyone know how libedit is supposed to be configured? readline
> > > uses /etc/inputrc but libedit either does not or doesn't understand all
> > > of it.
> > > 
> > > /me wonders if it was really necessary to switch from readline
> > 
> > I'll note that it is all working find on Arch.
> > The behaviour is indistinguishable to readline.
> > 
> > Perhaps the editline package is correctly configured here?
> 
> Does the arch editline package include a config file? /etc/something?
> 

Hmm... I don't see anything weird configuration-wise,

http://www.archlinux.org/packages/extra/x86_64/libedit/

Chasing up the maintainer...

-- Don
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 - EditLine / terminal incompatibility?

[Duncan Coutts]

On Fri, 2008-11-07 at 13:02 -0800, Don Stewart wrote:

> > Does anyone know how libedit is supposed to be configured? readline
> > uses /etc/inputrc but libedit either does not or doesn't understand all
> > of it.
> > 
> > /me wonders if it was really necessary to switch from readline
> 
> I'll note that it is all working find on Arch.
> The behaviour is indistinguishable to readline.
> 
> Perhaps the editline package is correctly configured here?

Does the arch editline package include a config file? /etc/something?

Duncan

___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 - EditLine / terminal incompatibility?

[Don Stewart]

duncan.coutts:
> On Fri, 2008-11-07 at 12:13 +0100, Philip K.F. Hölzenspies wrote:
> 
> > It seems editline has some incompatibility with my terminal. Maybe, I 
> > should 
> > configure something differently, but any and all of the control characters 
> > I 
> > type and work for all readline based (and all custom line-readers I have 
> > come 
> > across), but not for the new ghci. Most annoying is the fact that backspace 
> > doesn't work (instead, the control sequence ^? is printed and pressing 
> > enter 
> > results in "lexical error at character '\DEL'"). However, arrow keys (left 
> > ^[[D, up ^[[A, right ^[[C and down ^[[B) and common Ctrl+_ combinations 
> > (^d, 
> > ^e, ^a) also give similar errors. It is striking that the lexer does 
> > recognize them as the correct characters (printed error messages doe say 
> > \DEL, \EOT, \ENQ, etc).
> 
> I get some working and some non-working. Eg backspace, del, home, end
> work, but the ctl-left/ctl-right to jump words does not.
> 
> Does anyone know how libedit is supposed to be configured? readline
> uses /etc/inputrc but libedit either does not or doesn't understand all
> of it.
> 
> /me wonders if it was really necessary to switch from readline

I'll note that it is all working find on Arch.
The behaviour is indistinguishable to readline.

Perhaps the editline package is correctly configured here?

-- Don
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 - EditLine / terminal incompatibility?

[Duncan Coutts]

On Fri, 2008-11-07 at 09:14 -0800, Judah Jacobson wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 4:36 AM, Duncan Coutts
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > I get some working and some non-working. Eg backspace, del, home, end
> > work, but the ctl-left/ctl-right to jump words does not.
> >
> > Does anyone know how libedit is supposed to be configured? readline
> > uses /etc/inputrc but libedit either does not or doesn't understand all
> > of it.
> >
> > /me wonders if it was really necessary to switch from readline
> >
> > Duncan
> 
> You can configure libedit with a ~/.editrc file.
> 
> http://www.manpagez.com/man/5/editrc/

Thanks Judah.

To save everyone else having to read the man page and working out
through trial and error what the key escape codes are, add the following
to your ~/.editrc file.

# mappings for Ctrl-left-arrow and Ctrl-right-arrow for word moving
bind "\e[1;5D" vi-prev-word
bind "\e[1;5C" vi-next-word

(though from reading the readline /etc/inputrc it suggests that "\e[5C"
and "\e[5D" might be right on some systems)

It's unfortunate that editline does not seem to support any
global /etc/editrc file which would enable distros to make it do the
right thing by default like they do for readline.

Duncan

___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 - EditLine / terminal incompatibility?

[Judah Jacobson]

On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 4:36 AM, Duncan Coutts
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I get some working and some non-working. Eg backspace, del, home, end
> work, but the ctl-left/ctl-right to jump words does not.
>
> Does anyone know how libedit is supposed to be configured? readline
> uses /etc/inputrc but libedit either does not or doesn't understand all
> of it.
>
> /me wonders if it was really necessary to switch from readline
>
> Duncan

You can configure libedit with a ~/.editrc file.

http://www.manpagez.com/man/5/editrc/

-Judah
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 - EditLine / terminal incompatibility?

[Judah Jacobson]

On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 3:13 AM, Philip K.F. Hölzenspies
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dear Ian, all,
>
> After the announcement, I downloaded and installed the final release of
> 6.10.1. At some prior stage, I used the RC1 release, which had the same bug,
> but I had generally assumed it to be an RC-phenomenon. Which bug? Well...
>
> It seems editline has some incompatibility with my terminal. Maybe, I should
> configure something differently, but any and all of the control characters I
> type and work for all readline based (and all custom line-readers I have come
> across), but not for the new ghci. Most annoying is the fact that backspace
> doesn't work (instead, the control sequence ^? is printed and pressing enter
> results in "lexical error at character '\DEL'"). However, arrow keys (left
> ^[[D, up ^[[A, right ^[[C and down ^[[B) and common Ctrl+_ combinations (^d,
> ^e, ^a) also give similar errors. It is striking that the lexer does
> recognize them as the correct characters (printed error messages doe say
> \DEL, \EOT, \ENQ, etc).
>
> I'm using xterm (X.Org 6.8.99.903(229)) on an OpenSuSE 10.3 system and the
> default termcap settings. Any clues? Is this bug known?
>

If the arrow keys don't work, it's a good sign that ghc just wasn't
built with editline support.  To build againt editline, you will
probably need to install the libedit-devel package.

Hope that helps,
-Judah
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 - EditLine / terminal incompatibility?

[Duncan Coutts]

On Fri, 2008-11-07 at 12:13 +0100, Philip K.F. Hölzenspies wrote:

> It seems editline has some incompatibility with my terminal. Maybe, I should 
> configure something differently, but any and all of the control characters I 
> type and work for all readline based (and all custom line-readers I have come 
> across), but not for the new ghci. Most annoying is the fact that backspace 
> doesn't work (instead, the control sequence ^? is printed and pressing enter 
> results in "lexical error at character '\DEL'"). However, arrow keys (left 
> ^[[D, up ^[[A, right ^[[C and down ^[[B) and common Ctrl+_ combinations (^d, 
> ^e, ^a) also give similar errors. It is striking that the lexer does 
> recognize them as the correct characters (printed error messages doe say 
> \DEL, \EOT, \ENQ, etc).

I get some working and some non-working. Eg backspace, del, home, end
work, but the ctl-left/ctl-right to jump words does not.

Does anyone know how libedit is supposed to be configured? readline
uses /etc/inputrc but libedit either does not or doesn't understand all
of it.

/me wonders if it was really necessary to switch from readline

Duncan

___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users

Re: ANNOUNCE: GHC version 6.10.1 - EditLine / terminal incompatibility?

[Philip K.F. Hölzenspies]

Dear Ian, all,

After the announcement, I downloaded and installed the final release of 
6.10.1. At some prior stage, I used the RC1 release, which had the same bug, 
but I had generally assumed it to be an RC-phenomenon. Which bug? Well...

It seems editline has some incompatibility with my terminal. Maybe, I should 
configure something differently, but any and all of the control characters I 
type and work for all readline based (and all custom line-readers I have come 
across), but not for the new ghci. Most annoying is the fact that backspace 
doesn't work (instead, the control sequence ^? is printed and pressing enter 
results in "lexical error at character '\DEL'"). However, arrow keys (left 
^[[D, up ^[[A, right ^[[C and down ^[[B) and common Ctrl+_ combinations (^d, 
^e, ^a) also give similar errors. It is striking that the lexer does 
recognize them as the correct characters (printed error messages doe say 
\DEL, \EOT, \ENQ, etc).

I'm using xterm (X.Org 6.8.99.903(229)) on an OpenSuSE 10.3 system and the 
default termcap settings. Any clues? Is this bug known?

Regards,
Philip
___
Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
Glasgow-haskell-users@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users