search for: outputbold

...g> wrote: > >> I think depending on curses is gross, >> > > I totally agree, but I also don't have a better way of doing this. I agree > with Joerg that hard-coding escape sequences is not the way forward. > llvm is still hard-coding escape sequences (see Process::OutputBold() etc). As far as I understood, there wasn't a plan to change that. curses is only used to detect if the terminal supports escape codes. It sounds like nobody else minds llmv depending on additional libraries, so I'll drop this. Even though curses is available on pretty much every OS, the...

On 9 September 2013 01:09, Nico Weber <thakis at chromium.org> wrote: > I think depending on curses is gross, > I totally agree, but I also don't have a better way of doing this. I agree with Joerg that hard-coding escape sequences is not the way forward. Even though curses is available on pretty much every OS, there are hacks you have to do to port across OSs, especially old

Hi, llvm recently switched to using terminfo for detecting if terminals support escape codes. There's some discussion about this after the commit happened here: http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvm-commits/Week-of-Mon-20130805/183590.html After the discussion, it looks like the approach was switched from depending on curses on just terminfo. From what I gather (the changelog didn't