SRFI 205 POSIX Terminal Fundamentals on the march hga@xxxxxx (22 Feb 2021 17:54 UTC)
(missing)
Re: SRFI 205 POSIX Terminal Fundamentals on the march hga@xxxxxx (23 Mar 2021 16:27 UTC)
Re: SRFI 205 POSIX Terminal Fundamentals on the march Arthur A. Gleckler (23 Mar 2021 17:51 UTC)
Re: SRFI 205 POSIX Terminal Fundamentals on the march John Cowan (23 Mar 2021 18:44 UTC)
Re: SRFI 205 POSIX Terminal Fundamentals on the march hga@xxxxxx (22 May 2021 15:20 UTC)
Re: SRFI 205 POSIX Terminal Fundamentals on the march Alex Shinn (24 May 2021 01:50 UTC)

Re: SRFI 205 POSIX Terminal Fundamentals on the march Alex Shinn 24 May 2021 01:50 UTC

On Sun, May 23, 2021 at 12:20 AM <xxxxxx@ancell-ent.com> wrote:
>
> The (not ...) option for stty also falls to the "let's keep it simple" principle.
>
> The trouble with using `-canon` is that in R6RS it will have to be written `\u2D;canon`, which is grotesque.  So the simplest thing that can work will be (- canon).
>
> I'm not getting the point you're making unless this pertains to the Chibi Scheme stty (not ...) option, which I've discarded as being overly complicated for both the user and implementor.

You need to be able to turn terminal attributes off as well as on.
For example, (not echo) disables echoing and is essential for
many applications including editor functionality. You could replace
the generalized (not ...) form with individually inverted attribute
names, e.g. to match the stty(1) command usage -echo to disable
echoing, but as John points out, while this is a valid R7RS
identifier it would need to be escaped in R6RS.

I think the (chibi stty) approach is fine, but if you want the -echo
approach maybe a no- prefix is better, e.g. `no-echo`.

--
Alex