Re: Lua binding for curses

[Brett Lymn <blymn%internode.on.net@localhost>]

On Mon, Aug 07, 2023 at 03:05:05AM +0300, Valery Ushakov wrote:
> 
> I don't think it's productive to frame this as an "exclusive or"
> choice.  If we want to do comparison testing against ncurses, we can't
> expect identical sequence of commands for the identical output, e.g.
> the order of commands to turn on multiple applicable attributes may be
> different.  As for spaces vs. erase, since with wsemul we control the
> "wsscreen" implementation, we do distinguish them in the final result.
> Though I haven't yet looked into distinguishing default color vs.
> explicit color that is the same as the default...  But since we
> control defattr passed to attach emulop and wsscreen's allocatr op, we
> should be able to I think.
> 

Sure, for checking output of our curses vs ncurses, that is correct.
I was only speaking in the context of the libcurses atf tests, in
this context I am primarily interested in checking that 1) the
problem can be demonstrated to be fixed and 2) that the changees
do not result in excessive unexplained output.  This was actually
the primary focus when I started writing the atf testframe with
the view that I would make changes to the refresh code and would
then be able to objectively check the refresh code was working.

-- 
Brett Lymn
--
Sent from my NetBSD device.

"We are were wolves",
"You mean werewolves?",
"No we were wolves, now we are something else entirely",
"Oh"