On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 8:39 AM, Britton Kerin <britton.ke...@gmail.com> wrote: > > The point is it's *much* easier for you to do it. You know how terminal > programming works already, I don't. I *could* do it, but it would be > extremely > inefficient. >
I don't know how the current patch implements scrollback and I'm not sure how I would go about to improve it. The specifics would require me to open a source file and a patch and make sense of what either of these things do and how they work together. It's not hard per se to me because I did it a few times, but I did it a few times because I wanted to risk being extremely inefficient and having an interesting experience in having my mind boggled. > You say use dvtm. Under utter disregard wrt source line count and feature bloat I use tmux. > The st scrollback patches together are maybe 100 > lines. So, you're counting lines? By the start of the 21st century's standards, you're half way into reading code already. Why not go all the way? > don't kid yourself that it's a generally good approach for most users. Indeed. These things aren't a good approach for most users. I see suckless software as an academic collection of projects, MINIX comes to mind, which are reasonable in size and fit for a general example in their approach. However, of course you can't adjust everything super dynamically like on a KDE desktop, but that's already covered by the above premise. Making sense of it is, as we now have established, less work than in the usual case, which only brings me back to my point: Why aren't you going all the way? cheers! mar77i
