On 23/10/24 11:49AM, Kyryl Melekhin wrote:
> Besides, I want people to actually use my software and have some kind
> of visibility.
>
> Nobody would know of suckless.org were it not be constantly posted and
> talked about
> on various social media(s).
This touches up one of the fundamental
Страхиња,
On 10/24/23, Страхиња Радић wrote:
> On 23/10/23 03:11PM, Kyryl Melekhin wrote:
>> Since this is my creation I might be biased, but I still think that Nextvi
>> is
>> the best suckless editor.
>
> That should be left for others to decide.
>
>
>> Please give it a revisit, and help me
On 23/10/23 03:11PM, Kyryl Melekhin wrote:
> Since this is my creation I might be biased, but I still think that Nextvi is
> the best suckless editor.
That should be left for others to decide.
> Please give it a revisit, and help me get 100 stars on github!
Social networks should die. Github
Hi,
On Mon, Oct 23, 2023 at 10:52:11AM -0400, Sean MacLennan wrote:
> Basically, I agree that undo is hard.
Indeed. Ed gets undo by design keeping a history keeping a list of lines
and every modification implies a new list, so you can always undo (at least
once).
Regards,
Hey guys,
On this topic, I would like to revisit Nextvi. It's been a year since
my last post.
The editor has been getting some lovely quality of life updates while still
adhering to the original philosophy.
Since this is my creation I might be biased, but I still think that Nextvi is
the best
On Tue, 24 Oct 2023 01:26:24 +0200
Arthur Jacquin wrote:
> I'm interested in having a look at the code too, in case you want to
> share it ;)
No problem. See the README.md for a brief history of zedit. It is
probably too big to be suckless, even in its greatly reduced state.
Most of the cool
On Sun, 22 Oct 2023 11:12:09 +0200
Arthur Jacquin wrote:
> Undo-ing is clearly a non-trivial feature.
I wrote my own editor (zedit or z) in the late '80s. At that time none
of the editors I was using had undo... so I didn't add it.
It wasn't until I switched to emacs a decade later that I had
Hi Arthur,
> I understand that some people may miss the undo feature, as it's so
> common in others tools. I've given it a lot of thought when designing
> edit. As you pointed out, undo-ing is tightly linked to the data
> structures, so leaving it aside had major implications on the
>
+1 on undo. (but, i'm an emacs user, not likely to ever be part of your
customer base... :)
This looks pretty nice, I also like the fact that bindings
are easily configurables.
I have a few patches that I'll propose later after more usage.
Thanks for your nice reply! Can't wait to see your patches ;)
One thing that I miss there though, as a luser, is editing history.
To me, undo-ing
> Hello suckless developers,
Salut Arthur !
> This is my first time here, I hope I'm doing everything correctly :)
Welcome,
> Already aware of and enthusiastic about the suckless philosophy, I
> started by exploring the text editors referenced there[1]. I was
> looking for the combination of a
On 23/09/28 09:02AM, David Demelier wrote:
> Not sure if that helps but I eventually stopped adding flags at all and
> use just the defaults everywhere. Otherwise I'd be glad to understand
> if there is a complete and strict conformance explanation on those
> combinations.
As Adam noted, the
On Wed, 2023-09-27 at 22:33 +0200, Страхиња Радић wrote:
> On closer inspection, termbox2.h does include signal.h itself[1], and
> additionally defines _XOPEN_SOURCE[2] and _DEFAULT_SOURCE, so the
> inclusion of
> signal.h can't be escaped.
>
> My testing has shown that when -std=c99 is
Страхиња Радић writes:
> On closer inspection, termbox2.h does include signal.h itself[1], and
> additionally defines _XOPEN_SOURCE[2] and _DEFAULT_SOURCE, so the
> inclusion of signal.h can't be escaped.
I suspect the problem is that these kinds of macros need to be defined
before *any* of the
On closer inspection, termbox2.h does include signal.h itself[1], and
additionally defines _XOPEN_SOURCE[2] and _DEFAULT_SOURCE, so the inclusion of
signal.h can't be escaped.
My testing has shown that when -std=c99 is specified, it is as if that switch
explicitly undefines
On 27/09/2023 17:10, Страхиња Радић wrote:
On 23/09/27 03:50PM, Arthur Jacquin wrote:
termbox2.h is not C99 compliant, yet the -std=c99 compilation flag is
set in the default configuration. On the compilers I tried, it has not
been a problem as the non-C99 parts were ignored, but I shouldn't
Hello Dan,
Dan wrote:
termbox2.h:2209:22: error: storage size of ‘sa’ isn’t known
termbox2.h:2345:46: error: ‘struct sigaction’ has no member named ‘sa_handler’
termbox2.h:2345:44: error: invalid use of undefined type ‘struct sigaction’
Seems like termbox2.h expects something in your headers
On 23/09/27 03:50PM, Arthur Jacquin wrote:
> termbox2.h is not C99 compliant, yet the -std=c99 compilation flag is
> set in the default configuration. On the compilers I tried, it has not
> been a problem as the non-C99 parts were ignored, but I shouldn't have
> assumed it would always be this
Hi Arthur, I tried to build your project, but it failed for me:
termbox2.h:2209:22: error: storage size of 'sa' isn't known
termbox2.h:2345:46: error: 'struct sigaction' has no member named
'sa_handler'
termbox2.h:2345:44: error: invalid use of undefined type 'struct
sigaction'
All the best,
Hi Arthur, I tried to build your project, but it failed for me:
termbox2.h:2209:22: error: storage size of ‘sa’ isn’t known
termbox2.h:2345:46: error: ‘struct sigaction’ has no member named ‘sa_handler’
termbox2.h:2345:44: error: invalid use of undefined type ‘struct sigaction’
All the best,
Dan
20 matches
Mail list logo
