Re: lighten my darkness - vim 60ah Win95 dosbox and UNIX vim -d color selection
- In article <200106011102.f51B2ld06082@...> of Fri, 1 Jun 2001
13:02:47 in !vim-dev, Bram Moolenaar <Bram@...> writes
>As W9X shells do not provide the ability to redirect stderr, I suggest
>Walter Briscoe wrote:
>> See the attachment for version information.
>32 bit MS-DOS, that's compiled with DJGPP. I think there was a problem of
>this version clearing the screen when starting up. I'm not sure if this can
>be avoided when starting in Ex mode. I'll put this in the todo list.
>> BTW. --version does not write to stdout and, so, is not redirectable to a
>> file. I guess it writes to stderr.
>Yes, you need to redirect stderr.
the ports to those "operating systems" should write --version output to
stdout. The same does not apply to NTX where the shell is cmd. However,
I think it would do no harm in that case.
>Yes! That is the conclusion.
>> >Vim can transform a color name into a color number, but this is guessing,
>> >since you can change the colors in various ways (with X resources, for
>> >example). The transformation in the other direction isn't reliable for this
>> >reason, thus it's not done. Also, when using an xterm with 88 or 256 colors,
>> >many numbers don't have a name.
>> Then, I would be happier with a number and a name if available. If the
>> mapping of names to numbers is many to one, pick the first. Where is
>> this coded?
>Showing both a number and the most probably color name? Would be useful.
>This is in the highlight_list_one() function.
>[long text of experiments removed]
>> O.K. Setting t_Co=16 causes LightBlue and DarkBlue to be distinguished.
>> However, I seem to only have 8 background colours on the telnet client
>> which actually drives my screen.
>> I have hacked in a hi DiffAdd with ctermbg=Black which deals with the
>> immediate concern.
>I'm not sure if I understand all of this. Was the conclusion that Vim wasn't
>wrong, but the problem was caused by light and dark blue being the same color?
- Walter Briscoe wrote:
> >> BTW. --version does not write to stdout and, so, is not redirectable to aYou can redirect stderr in theory. Command.com can't though.
> >> file. I guess it writes to stderr.
> >Yes, you need to redirect stderr.
> As W9X shells do not provide the ability to redirect stderr, I suggest
> the ports to those "operating systems" should write --version output to
> stdout. The same does not apply to NTX where the shell is cmd. However,
> I think it would do no harm in that case.
It's not easy to send the message to stdout, because the ":version" command
uses the same code.
hundred-and-one symptoms of being an internet addict:
68. Your cat always puts viruses on your dogs homepage
/// Bram Moolenaar -- Bram@... -- http://www.moolenaar.net \\\
((( Creator of Vim -- http://vim.sf.net -- ftp://ftp.vim.org/pub/vim )))
\\\ Help me helping AIDS orphans in Uganda - http://iccf-holland.org ///