Hi,
On Thu, 10 Oct 2019, Denton Liu wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 10:42:20AM +0900, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > Denton Liu <liu.denton@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> >
> > > static int calculate_width(const struct strbuf *row)
> > > {
> > > int in_termcode = 0;
> > > int width = 0;
> > > int i;
> > >
> > > for (i = 0; i < row.len; i++) {
> > > if (row.buf[i] == '\033')
> > > in_termcode = 1;
> > >
> > > if (!in_termcode)
> > > width++;
> > > else if (row.buf[i] == 'm')
> > > in_termcode = 0;
> > > }
> > > }
> >
> > Not every byte that is outside the escape sequence contributes to
> > one display columns. You would want to take a look at utf8_width()
> > for inspiration.
> >
>
> Heh, I guess you're right. Looking right below the definition of
> utf8_width, I realised we have the utf8_strnwidth function. We should be
> able to just call
>
> utf8_strnwidth(row.buf, row.len, 1);
Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't we want to keep track of the columns
*only* in the part with the actual line graph, i.e. we're not at all
interested in the onelines' widths?
If so, I could imagine that a good idea would be to introduce
struct graphbuf {
struct strbuf buf;
int width;
};
and then introduce wrappers for `_addch()` and whatever else is used in
`graph.c`, these wrappers will increment the width together with the
`buf.len` field, and one additional helper that adds color sequences to
that graphbuf that leaves `width` unchanged.
Ciao,
Dscho
