On 2014-05-23 12:48 +0100, Nicholas Marriott wrote: > I think this can be made neater by making xterm_keys_modifiers do all > the work directly rather than searching for the _ all over again, > please look at this:
Yes, this approach looks much nicer, thanks! Two nits: > + if (buf[*pos] < '0' || buf[*pos] > '9') > + return (-1); > + flags = buf[(*pos)++] - '0'; > + if (buf[*pos] >= '0' && buf[*pos] <= '9') > + flags = (flags * 10) + (buf[(*pos)++] - '0'); You will need a "flags -= 1" after this because for some weird reason this bitmask has an offset of 1. Without this tmux generates different escape sequences than what you get in xterm. > + if (flags & 16) > + *modifiers != KEYC_ESCAPE; s/!/|/ otherwise this has no effect. But why is checking the fifth bit needed at all when we only have 4 modifiers? -- Balazs ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos. Get unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform available Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free." http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs _______________________________________________ tmux-users mailing list tmux-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tmux-users
