![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
GHC replaced readline with libedit, and then libedit recently (as of 6.10.3) with Haskeline, which is rather feature limited at the moment but under heavy development. I've Haskeline to the list of links, but if there are yet more readline-style libraries being implemented (I know of only these three), we may want to consider starting a separate page listing readline-type libraries.
How can it be a point of criticism against Readline that software wanting to link against it does not abide by the terms it has been freely licensed by? That's akin to criticizing someone for not giving their belongings away for free. At best, you could call it a disadvantage to someone.-- 217.157.165.109 ( talk) 08:15, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
The edit that started the "Criticism" section appears to be from a disgruntled user. Does anyone think the criticism section contains a neutral point of view? 124.168.145.191 ( talk) 13:02, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
In Debian psql is compliled against libedit and uses libreadline at runtime due to license issues with OpenSSL
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=607907 http://blog.endpoint.com/2011/08/debian-postgres-readline-psql-problem.html
Compukid ( talk) 13:25, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
The text on the article still reads as if the choice of using the GPL was something that was done because GNU readline was the only implementation that offered this kind of features in 1989.
This does not seem to be correct. In 1983, there was the Korn Shell with a command line history editor and in 1984, there was "bsh" with a command line history editor (based on my concepts from my original prototype implementation from 1982). The code from "bsh" is now used in the Bourne Shell. I cannot tell whether I was first or whether David was first, but this happened ~ 7 years before bash/GNU readline was written. So there was an alternative. I cannot speak for David and AT&T, but if people asked me, they could have received an implementation with a really free license at any time. Schily ( talk) 16:32, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
How would people feel about Kablamo's Readline Cheat Sheet and/or Shiar's readline cheat sheet as an external link? The article covers the keyboard shortcuts but in a less user-friendly way... II | ( t - c) 09:36, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
While readline is a library, its notability stems from its history and widespread usage. The API itself is nothing special and may not belong on-topic. While there is a precedent of code on Wikipedia, this is a large program compared to the size of the article. What is it really adding? Arzg ( talk) 23:57, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
There is no semantic difference between the two, as both will loop continuously, but I thought it may be more understandable by less technical readers to change to a while loop.
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
GHC replaced readline with libedit, and then libedit recently (as of 6.10.3) with Haskeline, which is rather feature limited at the moment but under heavy development. I've Haskeline to the list of links, but if there are yet more readline-style libraries being implemented (I know of only these three), we may want to consider starting a separate page listing readline-type libraries.
How can it be a point of criticism against Readline that software wanting to link against it does not abide by the terms it has been freely licensed by? That's akin to criticizing someone for not giving their belongings away for free. At best, you could call it a disadvantage to someone.-- 217.157.165.109 ( talk) 08:15, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
The edit that started the "Criticism" section appears to be from a disgruntled user. Does anyone think the criticism section contains a neutral point of view? 124.168.145.191 ( talk) 13:02, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
In Debian psql is compliled against libedit and uses libreadline at runtime due to license issues with OpenSSL
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=607907 http://blog.endpoint.com/2011/08/debian-postgres-readline-psql-problem.html
Compukid ( talk) 13:25, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
The text on the article still reads as if the choice of using the GPL was something that was done because GNU readline was the only implementation that offered this kind of features in 1989.
This does not seem to be correct. In 1983, there was the Korn Shell with a command line history editor and in 1984, there was "bsh" with a command line history editor (based on my concepts from my original prototype implementation from 1982). The code from "bsh" is now used in the Bourne Shell. I cannot tell whether I was first or whether David was first, but this happened ~ 7 years before bash/GNU readline was written. So there was an alternative. I cannot speak for David and AT&T, but if people asked me, they could have received an implementation with a really free license at any time. Schily ( talk) 16:32, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
How would people feel about Kablamo's Readline Cheat Sheet and/or Shiar's readline cheat sheet as an external link? The article covers the keyboard shortcuts but in a less user-friendly way... II | ( t - c) 09:36, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
While readline is a library, its notability stems from its history and widespread usage. The API itself is nothing special and may not belong on-topic. While there is a precedent of code on Wikipedia, this is a large program compared to the size of the article. What is it really adding? Arzg ( talk) 23:57, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
There is no semantic difference between the two, as both will loop continuously, but I thought it may be more understandable by less technical readers to change to a while loop.