Ever since 149594f974 (Initial revision, 2005-09-20), we move the
cursor to the end of the commandline just before executing it.
This is so we can move the cursor to the line below the command line,
so moving the cursor is relevant if one presses enter on say, the
first line of a multi-line commandline.
As mentioned in #10838 and others, it can be useful to restore the
cursor position when recalling commandline from history. Make undo
restore the position where enter was pressed, instead of implicitly
moving the cursor to the end. This allows to quickly correct small
mistakes in large commandlines that failed recently.
This requires a new way of moving the cursor below the command line.
Test changes include unrelated cleanup of history.py.
The prompt regex for pexpect was:
```
return re.compile(
r"""(?:\r\n?|^) # beginning of line
(?:\x1b[\d[KB(m]*)* # optional colors
(?:\x1b[\?2004h) # Bracketed paste
(?:\x1b[>4;1m) # XTerm's modifyOtherKeys
(?:\x1b[>5u) # CSI u with kitty progressive enhancement
(?:\x1b=) # set application keypad mode, so the keypad keys send unique codes
(?:\[.\]\ )? # optional vi mode prompt
"""
+ (r"prompt\ %d>" % counter) # prompt with counter
+ r"""
(?:\x1b[\d\[KB(m]*)* # optional colors
""",
re.VERBOSE,
)
```
This has a terrible bug: an accidentally unescaped bracket here:
(?:\x1b[>4;1m) # XTerm's modifyOtherKeys
^
This bracket then extends throughout the entire regex, and is
accidentally terminated here:
(?:\x1b[\d\[KB(m]*)* # optional colors
^
Thus the whole regex is busted; in particular the prompt counters are
not being tested correctly.
A second issue is that these escape sequences are not emitted before the
first prompt, so correcting the regex will cause every test to fail.
Fix this by ignoring all of the escape sequences and merely look for
the "prompt %d>" portion.
THIS DELIBERATELY CAUSES TEST FAILURES.
The tests were already broken and falsely reported as passing.
These will be fixed in followup commits.
Good news is that the tests should become way more reliable after
this is fixed - hopefully no more introducing random sleep() calls.
A failing test might emit an OSC 133 prompt marking sequence, confusing
the parent terminal to think the test output contains a shell prompt. Let's
remove these.
Some terminals send the focus-in sequences ("^[I") whenever focus reporting is
enabled. We enable focus reporting whenever we are finished running a command.
If we run two commands without reading in between, the focus sequences
will show up on the terminal.
Fix this by enabling focus-reporting as late as possible.
This fixes the problem with `^[I` showing up when running "cat" in
gnome-terminal https://github.com/fish-shell/fish-shell/issues/10411.
This begs the question if we should do the same for CSI u and bracketed paste.
It's difficult to answer that; let's hope we find motivating test cases.
If we enable CSI u too late, we might misinterpret key presses, so for now
we still enable those as early as possible.
Also, since we now read immediately after enabling focus events, we can get
rid of the hack where we defer enabling them until after the first prompt.
When I start a fresh terminal, the ^[I no longer shows up.
See the changelog additions for user-visible changes.
Since we enable/disable terminal protocols whenever we pass terminal ownership,
tests can no longer run in parallel on the same terminal.
For the same reason, readline shortcuts in the gdb REPL will not work anymore.
As a remedy, use gdbserver, or lobby for CSI u support in libreadline.
Add sleep to some tests, otherwise they fall (both in CI and locally).
There are two weird failures on FreeBSD remaining, disable them for now
https://github.com/fish-shell/fish-shell/pull/10359/checks?check_run_id=23330096362
Design and implementation borrows heavily from Kakoune.
In future, we should try to implement more of the kitty progressive
enhancements.
Closes#10359
This strips the newline from "code_context" (which is really just the
called function), and from the unescaped output.
Rather, in case the output doesn't end with a newline it'll mark it
with an explicit message "(no trailing newline)".
When a pexpect test fails, it reports the "failing line." Prior to this
commit, it did so by walking up the Python call stack, looking for
the first frame which is not in the pexpect_helper module, and so presumably
in the test itself. However sometimes the test wants to define a helper
function; then if the test fails the helper function is reported as the
failing line, not the callsite of the helper.
Fix this by skipping functions which have the `callsite_skip` attribute set.
Nothing to relnote here.
For littlecheck/pexpect this just unconditionally enables color.
I have no idea what happens if you run cmake outside of a terminal
, but the worst that can happen is that *errors* have color
escapes in them.
If someone figures out how to get cmake to tell us if it's running in
a terminal, we can add a check.
Ensure that the increment= param is set via keyword, not via positional arg.
This mistake was masking a bug where the "^a b c" match was not being tested,
because it was being set as the value for increment!
This switches the 'increment' param from "after" to "before." Instead
of expect_prompt saying if the next prompt will be incremented, each
call site says if it should have been incremented sinec the last prompt.
The result is just the *index* of the pattern that matched. But since
we never pass a *list* it's just always 0.
spawn.match is the MatchObject that produced the match, so it can be
used to post-process the matched output, e.g.
```python
m = expect_re('\d+')
m.group() # is now the matched number
```
Prior to this change, if we saw more than one repaint readline command in
a row, we would try to ignore the second one. However this was never the
right thing to do since sometimes we really do need to repaint twice in a
row (e.g. the user hits Ctrl+L twice). Previously we were saved by the
buginess of this mechanism but with the repainting refactoring we see
missing redraws.
Remove the coalescing logic and add a test. Fixes#7280.
I really kinda hate how insistent clang-format is to have line
breaks *IFF THE LINE IS TOO LONG*.
Like... lemme just add a break if it looks better, will you?
But it is the style at this time, so we shall tie an onion to our
belt.
This was sometimes slightly annoying in porting.
5 is enough most of the time, 10 should be enough basically always,
without being too annoying if you don't need it.
Make it easier to use pexpect and to understand its error messages.
Switch to a style in tests using bound methods, which makes them
less noisy to write.
This adds a new interactive test framework based on Python's pexpect. This
is intended to supplant the TCL expect-based tests.
New tests go in `tests/pexpects/`. As a proof-of-concept, the
pipeline.expect test and the (gnarly) bind.expect test are ported to the
new framework.
