Lile a small fast configurable line editing facility
Interpreters, e.g., k and q, sometimes have no command line history or editing. A solution frequently recommended for k and q is rlwrap. I find rlwrap too big and slow, especially for the tiny, fast k and q interpreters. It feels sluggish. I have begun experimenting with "lile", a modified version of "ile" which apparently dates back to 1988. I have not seen it discussed anywhere on today's www. It is small and fast. Custom key commands can be assigned per application using configuration files. More info: https://ift.tt/2IFSPYb https://ift.tt/2tGxc58 https://ift.tt/2KBU0d1 Do HN readers have other suggestions? Below are some familiar options I have explored. Dates may be wrong. linenoise (2010) https://ift.tt/UEFmXW libtecla (2001) https://ift.tt/1uaQriC editline (1992) https://ift.tt/2Nc3BsN editline (1992) https://ift.tt/2KFp4ss readline (1989) https://ift.tt/2gURhgG 0 comments on Hacker News.
Interpreters, e.g., k and q, sometimes have no command line history or editing. A solution frequently recommended for k and q is rlwrap. I find rlwrap too big and slow, especially for the tiny, fast k and q interpreters. It feels sluggish. I have begun experimenting with "lile", a modified version of "ile" which apparently dates back to 1988. I have not seen it discussed anywhere on today's www. It is small and fast. Custom key commands can be assigned per application using configuration files. More info: https://ift.tt/2IFSPYb https://ift.tt/2tGxc58 https://ift.tt/2KBU0d1 Do HN readers have other suggestions? Below are some familiar options I have explored. Dates may be wrong. linenoise (2010) https://ift.tt/UEFmXW libtecla (2001) https://ift.tt/1uaQriC editline (1992) https://ift.tt/2Nc3BsN editline (1992) https://ift.tt/2KFp4ss readline (1989) https://ift.tt/2gURhgG
Interpreters, e.g., k and q, sometimes have no command line history or editing. A solution frequently recommended for k and q is rlwrap. I find rlwrap too big and slow, especially for the tiny, fast k and q interpreters. It feels sluggish. I have begun experimenting with "lile", a modified version of "ile" which apparently dates back to 1988. I have not seen it discussed anywhere on today's www. It is small and fast. Custom key commands can be assigned per application using configuration files. More info: https://ift.tt/2IFSPYb https://ift.tt/2tGxc58 https://ift.tt/2KBU0d1 Do HN readers have other suggestions? Below are some familiar options I have explored. Dates may be wrong. linenoise (2010) https://ift.tt/UEFmXW libtecla (2001) https://ift.tt/1uaQriC editline (1992) https://ift.tt/2Nc3BsN editline (1992) https://ift.tt/2KFp4ss readline (1989) https://ift.tt/2gURhgG 0 comments on Hacker News.
Interpreters, e.g., k and q, sometimes have no command line history or editing. A solution frequently recommended for k and q is rlwrap. I find rlwrap too big and slow, especially for the tiny, fast k and q interpreters. It feels sluggish. I have begun experimenting with "lile", a modified version of "ile" which apparently dates back to 1988. I have not seen it discussed anywhere on today's www. It is small and fast. Custom key commands can be assigned per application using configuration files. More info: https://ift.tt/2IFSPYb https://ift.tt/2tGxc58 https://ift.tt/2KBU0d1 Do HN readers have other suggestions? Below are some familiar options I have explored. Dates may be wrong. linenoise (2010) https://ift.tt/UEFmXW libtecla (2001) https://ift.tt/1uaQriC editline (1992) https://ift.tt/2Nc3BsN editline (1992) https://ift.tt/2KFp4ss readline (1989) https://ift.tt/2gURhgG
Hacker News story: Lile a small fast configurable line editing facility
![Hacker News story: Lile a small fast configurable line editing facility]()
Reviewed by Tha Kur
on
July 01, 2018
Rating:
No comments: