On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 3:28 PM, Anselm R Garbe<garb...@gmail.com> wrote: > 2009/8/22 Ray Kohler <ataraxia...@gmail.com>: >> I'm rather curious on where st will go, and what kinds of things other >> terminals do that it will or won't do. > > Well my plan is to achieve *good* xterm compliance and 256 color > support. As you know xterm is not really fully vt100 or vt220 > compliant, so that's also not a goal of st. Rather other features like > the integration of filters that can listen to the terminal output and > do certain things like changing the background color, to experiment > with some ideas like having different colors depending on the > directory/host you are in, or the planned st server that keeps > terminal sessions survive X shutdowns.
I love the server idea. I'm using urxvtd now, and it's already very nice. A persistent server like you propose is something I never even thought of. >> In particular: >> - Is a scrollback buffer objectionable in principle, such that we >> should expect to "just use GNU screen"? > > Yes, though there must be an upper limit configurable, where 0 means > no limit, or until the process can't increase the buffer using > malloc() anymore... Unlimited scrollback is one of the few things I miss from my OS X days. (Of course, the Mac Terminal's scrollback is rather broken, so I don't miss it that much...) In general, you're making st sound much more interesting than I hoped it would be. I was expecting an ultra-bare-bones terminal - something like the terminal equivalent of surf. An ultra-smart terminal is even better :)
