On Mar 26, 2009, at 4:29 PM, Luke Daley wrote: > > On 26/03/2009, at 10:34 PM, Martin Kühl wrote: > >> On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 00:50, Luke Daley <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> On 26/03/2009, at 4:45 AM, Martin Kühl wrote: >>> >>>> • Passing the :input and :interactive_input options through to the >>>> underlying TM::Process.run invokation. >>>> The Maude bundle uses this to script the maude interpreter from the >>>> TextMate command, usually to wrap a command around the current >>>> word/selection. >>>> • Deactivating the interactive input library if the variable >>>> TM_INTERACTIVE_INPUT_DISABLED is defined. >>>> Allan requested this on IRC. >>> >>> What was the reason for needing two ways to disable interactive >>> input? >> >> As I understand it, one way works on the command level, where it >> doesn’t make sense for some commands to receive interactive input, >> while the other works on the project (or global) level, where >> unfortunate circumstances make the interactive input library behave >> badly (this should, to quote Allan, "solve that/those python >> problems"). >> >> If you mean that commands could set TM_INTERACTIVE_INPUT_DISABLED >> instead of :interactive_input to disable it, I guess that’s more of a >> stylistic question, but think that it should be consistent for >> Executor.run and Process.run. >> >> Does that answer your question? > > Yes, fair enough. > > What are the problems with it though? Are they bugs in > tm_interactive_input.dylib?
Yes, tm_interactive_input.dylib is causing some python programs to crash mysteriously. Something to do with flat-namespacing. —Alex _______________________________________________ textmate-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.macromates.com/listinfo/textmate-dev
