Lele Gaifax added the comment: In https://github.com/lelit/cpython/commit/3e5e557a876831a99c21f5a173623cb05ff48abf I reimplemented the functionality in a slightly different and hopefully better way, rebasing it on current master.
IANAL, but I think that the new approach is different enough from the original GNU bash code to be considered safe from the license point of view. I still could not test it against the editline alternative implementation: AFAICT all the functions and symbols I used are exposed by that library too, so it may work without resorting to #ifdefs. In that regards however, I think we could and should take a different approach in determining which underlying implementation is used: GNU readline >= 4.1 exposes a rl_gnu_readline_p flag that could be used at configure time to define a IS_GNU_READLINE, and then rely on that to implement different code paths within the readline.c module. Please let me know if I should upload a traditional patch, instead of referencing my branch on github. As usual, thank you for any review and feedback! ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue22228> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
