Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: Linenoise NG – GNU Readline Replacement, with UTF8 and Windows (BSD)

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 53 posts

Re: Show HN: Linenoise NG – GNU Readline Replacement, with UTF8 and Windows (BSD)

#21

Post by davexunit »

_ph_ wrote: post #17
davexunit wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps they should use the GPL.

There are a lot of programs, which cannot use GPL for some of its restrictions, e.g. commercial software. But also in general, it is quite restrictive to have to change your softwares license just to use a certain library. Consequently, a lot of non-gpl open source software rather not uses readline than changing their license. I am very happy about any more liberally licensed alternative.

>There are a lot of programs, which cannot use GPL for some of its restrictions, e.g. commercial software.

You mean proprietary software. People that write free software do not want their work used in software that does not guarantee that users will have the same freedoms that they gave to others. I think the thing that a lot of people overlook here is that the proprietary software developers want to impose their own set of restrictions that are incompatible with free software. Let's not pity the poor company that cannot profit off the work of others without sharing back.

Re: Show HN: Linenoise NG – GNU Readline Replacement, with UTF8 and Windows (BSD)

#22

Post by lobster_johnson »

davexunit wrote: post #4

All of this to get around the GPL. Boo!

I wonder why that was necessary, since NetBSD's libedit exists in a portable form. It is (or was) the default on OS X.

http://thrysoee.dk/editline/

Edit: libedit is mentioned in the readme, and it's implied that the reason for this other library is code size.

Re: Show HN: Linenoise NG – GNU Readline Replacement, with UTF8 and Windows (BSD)

#23

Post by Xophmeister »

don71 wrote: post #16
davexunit wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GNU Readline is GPL on purpose. It's not the GNU project's fault that Redis cannot use Readline. The Redis maintainer isn't interested in protecting user freedom with copyleft, which means that Redis has to live without Readline.

Why is GPL better than BSD for example. I have the full source code of Redis and I can do any change I like. Why is copyleft per se a better solution?

"Better" is subjective. The virility of the GPL gives it certain properties that a BSD license doesn't, which is important to some [many].

Re: Show HN: Linenoise NG – GNU Readline Replacement, with UTF8 and Windows (BSD)

#24

Post by davexunit »

antirez wrote: post #19
davexunit wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GNU Readline is GPL on purpose. It's not the GNU project's fault that Redis cannot use Readline. The Redis maintainer isn't interested in protecting user freedom with copyleft, which means that Redis has to live without Readline.

You nailed it: I pass my days writing OSS code since 1997 and ship Redis with a license that provides the end user more freedom to do whatever she/he wants, because I'm not interested in protecting the user freedom.

This little haiku by RMS sums it up nicely:

    Using GPL
    is encroaching on our right
    to encroach on yours
The "more" freedom you are speaking of is the freedom to choose to deny others freedom.

Re: Show HN: Linenoise NG – GNU Readline Replacement, with UTF8 and Windows (BSD)

#25

Post by yyin »

jimrandomh wrote: post #10

I'm all for replacing readline. It's an ancient, very closely linked to the everyday experience of using the command line, and not very good. I want my REPLs to have things like syntax highlighting and decent tab completion UI, and readline has positioned itself to have a monopoly on the ability to implement these things but failed to deliver. But this isn't addressing the real problem, which is that readline gets co…

"But this isn't addressing the real problem..."

Well, he addressed a real problem in my opinion: readline is too large and too complicated for many uses.

I used hping in the old days; while I'm not a Redis user (I use cdb and kdb+ for key/value stores), I really appreciate linenoise. I use it everyday.

I thank the author for a very useful contribution.

Re: Show HN: Linenoise NG – GNU Readline Replacement, with UTF8 and Windows (BSD)

#26

Post by detaro »

davexunit wrote: post #21
_ph_ wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are a lot of programs, which cannot use GPL for some of its restrictions, e.g. commercial software. But also in general, it is quite restrictive to have to change your softwares license just to use a certain library. Consequently, a lot of non-gpl open source software rather not uses readline than changing their license. I am very happy about any more liberally licensed alternative.

>There are a lot of programs, which cannot use GPL for some of its restrictions, e.g. commercial software. You mean proprietary software. People that write free software do not want their work used in software that does not guarantee that users will have the same freedoms that they gave to others. I think the thing that a lot of people overlook here is that the proprietary software developers want to impose their own…

I think everyone here is aware of that, and programmers choosing GPL are free to so.

You are the one that came here and chastised people for not agreeing with your license preferences.

Re: Show HN: Linenoise NG – GNU Readline Replacement, with UTF8 and Windows (BSD)

#27

Post by fceller »

lobster_johnson wrote: post #22
davexunit wrote: post #4

All of this to get around the GPL. Boo!

I wonder why that was necessary, since NetBSD's libedit exists in a portable form. It is (or was) the default on OS X. http://thrysoee.dk/editline/ Edit: libedit is mentioned in the readme, and it's implied that the reason for this other library is code size.

Another reason is Windows. Even READLINE breaks when used on Windows with UTF-8 characters.

Re: Show HN: Linenoise NG – GNU Readline Replacement, with UTF8 and Windows (BSD)

#28

Post by _ph_ »

davexunit wrote: post #21
_ph_ wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are a lot of programs, which cannot use GPL for some of its restrictions, e.g. commercial software. But also in general, it is quite restrictive to have to change your softwares license just to use a certain library. Consequently, a lot of non-gpl open source software rather not uses readline than changing their license. I am very happy about any more liberally licensed alternative.

>There are a lot of programs, which cannot use GPL for some of its restrictions, e.g. commercial software. You mean proprietary software. People that write free software do not want their work used in software that does not guarantee that users will have the same freedoms that they gave to others. I think the thing that a lot of people overlook here is that the proprietary software developers want to impose their own…

As the recent years showed, most companies have no problems "sharing back" modifications of open source products. Some companies (MS, Apple) even open sourced their own developments. The problem is not sharing back. The problem is, that GPL forces the whole program to be open in source and freely shareable between people. Most commercial software cannot exist with such a business model.

Re: Show HN: Linenoise NG – GNU Readline Replacement, with UTF8 and Windows (BSD)

#29

Post by cmsd2 »

there are a lot of forks of linenoise out there now.

this one looks good, but it's a big task to pick through all the divergent copies of the code and figure out which ones have genuine improvements and which ones are now rotting.

there's a rust one too which i recently added mingw/msvc support to. that's actually an example of how this splintering could be causing problems because we've just vendored some upstream version of the native c code and changes may be difficult to send back upstream.

Re: Show HN: Linenoise NG – GNU Readline Replacement, with UTF8 and Windows (BSD)

#30

Post by epistasis »

davexunit wrote: post #24
antirez wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You nailed it: I pass my days writing OSS code since 1997 and ship Redis with a license that provides the end user more freedom to do whatever she/he wants, because I'm not interested in protecting the user freedom.

This little haiku by RMS sums it up nicely: Using GPL is encroaching on our right to encroach on yours The "more" freedom you are speaking of is the freedom to choose to deny others freedom.

Let me preface my comment by saying that the purpose of my comment is to let you know why I, an unconverted heathen, do not find your chain of comments compelling. I do not mean to convince you of my point of view, or to refute your points, but tell you why I'm unmoved.

Repeating the same mantra, more forcefully, does not make it any more convincing or true.

I find RMS's reasoning fundamentally flawed, overly simplistic, and though perhaps good in the short-term (less than a decade), detrimental to his stated goals over longer terms. Every couple years I revisit it, and discuss with true believers like you, and am just as unconvinced.

GPL denies me and all users freedoms, and the inability of GPL supporters to even acknowledge that point tells me that politics has overtaken philosophy. The arguments for the GPL may have had more sway over me back in the 90s, but now with decades of actual data from BSD projects, I'm less than convinced that GPL offers more freedom for anybody. In fact, the exact opposite appears to be true.

Politicking is a way to shut off people's brains long enough that lots of people can move in the same direction. Politicking has it's uses, but it has to stop and be reevaluated in order to make sure that his direction is correct, and that has not seemed to happen in the past few decades.

Post reply on HN