[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       bash-bug
Subject:    Re: edit-and-execute-command is appropriately named, weird
From:       Chet Ramey <chet.ramey () case ! edu>
Date:       2011-05-31 16:20:54
Message-ID: 4DE51566.4060500 () case ! edu
[Download RAW message or body]

On 5/31/11 11:44 AM, David Thomas wrote:
> Oh, I wasn't asking you to do it, I was volunteering to.  I just
> wanted to be sure there wasn't some overriding reason it was done the
> way it was, and that there wouldn't be too many people relying on the
> present behavior.  As it is, I think I'll be taking a swing at it once
> my home internet is hooked up (which should be any day now...).

Please do.  I'd be very interested in what you come up with.  I'm sure
you're aware that the current function definition lives in bash
(bashline.c) rather than readline proper; if you implement there you
can employ all of the functionality bash provides.

Chet

-- 
``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer
		 ``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates
Chet Ramey, ITS, CWRU    chet@case.edu    http://cnswww.cns.cwru.edu/~chet/


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]