"Cook, Malcolm" <m...@stowers.org> writes: >>TL;DR: It is complicated. When we pull one string out, several more >>get entangled. > > Might there be a solution wherein both the interactive shell buffer and Org > are talking to a common underlying process? I would expect such to be > significantly more complicated, but perhaps better factored? Not that I'm > offering or capable of such a re-write 😉
comint buffer is doing exactly this - it is sending input (user comments) to the underlying shell process and receiving the output from that process, putting it back into the comit buffer. Unfortunately, there is no simple way to distinguish real output, shell echoing the submitted command, and shell prompt - shells do not provide any such information. The best they can provide is splitting between stdout and stderr. Alas. >>As a practical workaround, just do not use *shell* session names and >>session names that are the same as shell buffers you create manually. > > Is there perhaps another practical workaround you might suggest to me > involving a more intentional setting of the prompt and/or informing Org of my > choice of prompt (e.g. perhaps via setting a regexp to detect exactly my > prompt, and only when it is anchored to beginning of line)? That's also an option. What you need to fiddle with is `comint-prompt-regexp'. > Thanks so much for your careful explanation and pointers, and of course all > the work you do for Org ecosystem. Perhaps time for my 1st trip to > liberapay... 😉 Thanks for the kind words. -- Ihor Radchenko // yantar92, Org mode contributor, Learn more about Org mode at <https://orgmode.org/>. Support Org development at <https://liberapay.com/org-mode>, or support my work at <https://liberapay.com/yantar92>
