Re: [dev] [sandy] [PATCH] VIM key bindings.

2014-07-11 Thread Rafa Garcia Gallego
On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 12:32 AM, Dimitris Papastamos wrote: > There are many ways to do this, I'd go for the simplest approach in terms of > code > readability and stop worrying about performance. That. The reason sandy uses a double-linked list of lines is obviously not performance, but code s

Re: [dev] [sandy] [PATCH] VIM key bindings.

2014-07-11 Thread Maxime Coste
On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 03:59:01PM -0700, Charlie Kester wrote: > On Thu 10 Jul 2014 at 15:46:13 PDT Dimitris Papastamos wrote: > >On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 01:43:16AM +0300, Dimitris Zervas wrote: > >>First of all, we haven't even agree in which data structure will we use. > >>Buffer gap, piece tabl

Re: [dev] [st] Problem linking in OpenBSD

2014-07-11 Thread Roberto E. Vargas Caballero
> -l rt is a posix requirement > > (certain standard symbols may only be available for linking if the > specified -l flags are given to c99, see the extended description in > > http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/utilities/c99.html#tag_20_11_13 > > so yes, to avoid toolchain issues a

Re: [dev] [sandy] [PATCH] VIM key bindings.

2014-07-11 Thread Charlie Kester
On Fri 11 Jul 2014 at 01:48:39 PDT Maxime Coste wrote: On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 03:59:01PM -0700, Charlie Kester wrote: I agree. Start by identifying the editing operations that the data structure must support, no matter how it is implemented. Those operations will form the API for your data en

Re: [dev] [sandy] [PATCH] VIM key bindings.

2014-07-11 Thread Charlie Kester
On Fri 11 Jul 2014 at 06:06:39 PDT Charlie Kester wrote: On Fri 11 Jul 2014 at 01:48:39 PDT Maxime Coste wrote: On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 03:59:01PM -0700, Charlie Kester wrote: I agree. Start by identifying the editing operations that the data structure must support, no matter how it is impleme

Re: [dev] [sandy] [PATCH] VIM key bindings.

2014-07-11 Thread Dimitris Zervas
On July 11, 2014 4:26:12 PM EEST, Charlie Kester wrote: >On Fri 11 Jul 2014 at 06:06:39 PDT Charlie Kester wrote: >>On Fri 11 Jul 2014 at 01:48:39 PDT Maxime Coste wrote: >>>On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 03:59:01PM -0700, Charlie Kester wrote: I agree. Start by identifying the editing operations th

Re: [dev] [sandy] [PATCH] VIM key bindings.

2014-07-11 Thread Charlie Kester
On Fri 11 Jul 2014 at 06:35:50 PDT Dimitris Zervas wrote: Well, it's good to have an idea of what am I going to do, after this patch set. I was thinking of a super easy implementation, nearly without a buffer. Spit the chars to the screen and replace characters on the fly. When a buffer is neede

Re: [dev] [sandy] [PATCH] VIM key bindings.

2014-07-11 Thread Carlos Torres
On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 6:32 PM, Dimitris Papastamos wrote: > There are many ways to do this, I'd go for the simplest approach in terms of > code > readability and stop worrying about performance. > > If it is slow or memory hungry, it can be fixed later incrementally. > I agree with this approa

Re: [dev] [sandy] [PATCH] VIM key bindings.

2014-07-11 Thread Markus Teich
Carlos Torres wrote: > I agree with this approach, its how st has evolved and it makes sense. I disagree. Well designed code is also depending on well designed data structures. Data structures, especially core functionality ones, are not easily changed or even replaced by other ones in a later sta

Re: [dev] [sandy] [PATCH] VIM key bindings.

2014-07-11 Thread q
On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 09:47:33PM +0200, Markus Teich wrote: > I disagree. Well designed code is also depending on well designed data > structures. Data structures, especially core functionality ones, are not > easily > changed or even replaced by other ones in a later state of delelopment. They