Re: encapsulating directory operations

Path	csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From	vallor <vallor@cultnix.org>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.c, comp.programming
Subject	Re: encapsulating directory operations
Followup-To	comp.programming
Date	26 May 2025 04:05:25 GMT
Lines	32
Message-ID	<m9i7k5Fj42gU3@mid.individual.net> (permalink)
References	<100h650$23r5l$1@dont-email.me> <20250520065158.709@kylheku.com> <100i2la$292le$1@dont-email.me> <87a5770xjw.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <100j09o$2f04b$1@dont-email.me> <87tt5ezx9y.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <100j4t3$2foah$1@dont-email.me> <87ldqqzfj0.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <100kak8$2q0s6$1@dont-email.me> <87a575zvmb.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <100o3sc$3ll6t$1@dont-email.me> <87bjrkxonr.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <100ob9f$3n9m3$1@dont-email.me> <100ovse$3ubb5$1@dont-email.me> <87msb3ucmq.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <100p1u4$3um4p$1@dont-email.me> <10103i7$1jdii$1@dont-email.me> <87a570jpe6.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <101069l$1k3nm$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version	1.0
Content-Type	text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding	8bit
X-Trace	individual.net uzeI1bGNAZeR30Bl7kayUAi8iGLgH1wiArd2jfYOxfGti6X089
Cancel-Lock	sha1:bb6tdU/a2IGc3ycQa8Zfimww+qI= sha256:ZfHkkz+PVoMPDh01xHPMZRofstBojmIL2dBZq11ho3w=
X-Face	+McU)#<-H?9lTb(Th!zR`EpVrp<0)1p5CmPu.kOscy8LRp_\u`:tW;dxPo./(fCl CaKku`)]}.V/"6rISCIDP`
User-Agent	Pan/0.163 (Hmm5; 89a33f9d; Linux-6.14.8)
Xref	csiph.com comp.lang.c:393606 comp.programming:16785

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Followups directed to: comp.programming

Show key headers only | View raw

On Mon, 26 May 2025 08:40:50 +1000, "Paul Edwards" <mutazilah@gmail.com>
wrote in <101069l$1k3nm$1@dont-email.me>:

>> The idea that you can't do that without a constant defined in your
>> language standard is just silly.
> 
> It may be silly from your perspective, but for me it is crucial.

I've x-posted this to comp.programming, and set followup-to there.

I'm wondering why your control-character-handling wouldn't be better
handled with a curses library.  IIRC, back in my DOS days (early 90's),
there was a curses library for DOS.

A quick look around found this: https://pdcurses.org/ ...which
includes DOS support.

If it doesn't handle EBCDIC terminal escapes, consider extending it.

I don't know anything about microemacs, but if it doesn't use a curses-like
library to handle different terminal types, I'd be surprised.  I see that
Linus' uemacs uses curses:

   https://github.com/torvalds/uemacs/blob/master/tcap.c

Again, followup-to comp.programming, as this is definitely off-topic
for comp.lang.c.

-- 
-v System76 Thelio Mega v1.1 x86_64 NVIDIA RTX 3090 Ti
   OS: Linux 6.14.8 Release: Mint 22.1 Mem: 258G
   "Conformity obstructs progress."

Back to comp.programming | Previous | Next — Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Re: encapsulating directory operations vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2025-05-26 04:05 +0000
  Re: encapsulating directory operations "Paul Edwards" <mutazilah@gmail.com> - 2025-05-29 14:31 +1000

csiph-web