develooper Front page | perl.perl6.users | Postings from March 2018

Re: Debating on writing Editline bindings

Thread Previous | Thread Next
Fernando Santagata
March 30, 2018 12:55
Re: Debating on writing Editline bindings
Message ID:

Editline is available on Linux too:

$ apt-cache show libeditline0
Package: libeditline0
Source: editline
Version: 1.12-6.1
Installed-Size: 58
Maintainer: Sam Hocevar <>
Architecture: amd64
Depends: libc6 (>= 2.14)
Description-en: line editing library similar to readline
 This is a line-editing library. It can be linked into almost any program
 to provide command-line editing and recall. It is call-compatible with a
 subset of the FSF readline library, but it is a fraction of the size (and
 offers fewer features).
 This package contains the runtime library only.
Description-md5: e28c5d2becad50045c00c543a92be81c
Tag: role::shared-lib
Section: libs
Priority: optional
Filename: pool/main/e/editline/libeditline0_1.12-6.1_amd64.deb
Size: 12334
MD5sum: 64b0f5c52511cd23231f38121d96b083
SHA256: 8f568b217cfd343df49d8fc2faa488536328ace8572083a3cf4a8fc836de9e97

BTW, the Readline module is still interfacing to libreadline 6, while v.7
has been around for almost two years, so an alternative wouldn't harm.

On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 12:07 PM, Ben Davies <> wrote:

> At the moment, bindings for Readline and Linenoise are available, which
> are mainly used for making the REPL more convenient to use. Editline is
> a BSD-licensed alternative to the two that's part of the userland by
> default on FreeBSD, OpenBSD, and NetBSD. Having bindings for Editline
> would be more convenient for BSD users, since they don't have to install
> any additional libraries to use the REPL more comfortably. Would this be
> worthwhile writing? It fills a pretty narrow niche for users and I'm not
> sure how useful it would be to have.

Fernando Santagata

Thread Previous | Thread Next Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at | Group listing | About