Hello, Jindrich!
You wrote to "Leonard den Ottolander" <leonard den ottolander nl> on Wed, 23
Nov 2005 20:23:37 +0100:
JN> I agree with Andrey here, that we should use "ti" and "te" sequences
JN> acquired from termcap database instead of hardcoded ones. The problem
JN> is that Andrey uses direct putp() calls. The putp() belongs to ncurses
JN> and it doesn't seem to work when slang support is enabled.
JN> I propose this way to write termcap sequences to the terminal what
JN> should work even with slang:
JN> #ifdef HAVE_SLANG
JN> SLtt_write_string (ti_cap);
JN> #else
JN> putp (ti_cap);
JN> #endif
JN> and similarly for the te_cap.
I argee, of course. Modified patch is attached.
JN> The question is whether not to call SLtt_initialize () and friends in
JN> case of slang instead as slang takes care of setting proper ti/te
JN> sequences itself.
Hmm. For now we combine this approaches: we call SLtt_initialize (), we let
slang to take care of init itselt and prepare the SLtt_tgetstr() to work.
And then we use it to obtain ti/te sequences using proper slang mechanisms.
And the same in ncurses case, BTW.
The main points are:
from main():
#ifdef HAVE_SLANG
(1) slang_init () -> [ SLtt_get_terminfo() -> SLtt_initialize() ->
Term_Init_Str = SLtt_tgetstr ("ti") ]
#else
(2) init_curses () -> [ initscr() -> setupterm() ]
#endif
init_xterm_support ();
Using [] brackets I've marked slang internal code at (1) and ncurses
internal code at (2).
The "Term_Init_Str" is internal slang variable, and it is unavailable for us
in common case. This is correct for current mcslang and libslang-1.4.9 both.
So, what prevents us from calling the same SLtt_tgetstr ("ti") routine from
init_xterm_support() under "#ifdef HAVE_SLANG"?
--
With best regards, Andrey V. Malyshev.
E-mail: amal krasn ru
Attachment:
patch-xterm-ca-mode.gz
Description: Binary data