Control Signal field in mircrol_t

[ari26squared]

I think it would be very useful to have a more generic option to act on any control signal.

For me, I have it set so that can catch ^W to change my execute function back to the original execute function with out having to change any hardware data streams (uart). That is, I have access to all the nice stuff of typing into a command line while not having to muck around with updating my hardware input, if that makes sense.

The change would be here prv_control_char_process where you just set the signal value of mrl to ch and call the signal interrupt function provided by the user, which can have its own switch case to determine what to do.

I hope this makes sense to you. And I could just put in my own branch, but I think it should be here as well.

[dimmykar]

Hello! Thank you for participating in the project!

Your idea is quite interesting, there are many ^+key control keys that are not used by the library. So that the registered characters do not impact to already implemented ones in the library, I see the implementation of this field in the structure by using of an enumeration, for example, microrl_ctrl_signal_keys_t with keys available for callback (and not used in library yet). Also, it is possible to implement several of these signals with custom callbacks instead of one signal with one callback, using the microrl_ctrl_signal_t signals structure array with configurable size, and using a function for registering these signals. The possible implementation of the microrl_ctrl_signal_t is:

typedef enum {
    ....
    MICRORL_CTRL_SIGNAL_W = 0x77; /* 'w' ASCII code */
    ....
} microrl_ctrl_signal_keys_t;

typedef struct {
    microrl_ctrl_signal_keys_t key; /* Control signal key */
    microrl_ctrl_signal_fn ctrl_signal_fn; /* Control signal user's callback */
} microrl_ctrl_signal_t;

I will implement this feature in the near future, but now I have little free time. If you urgently need such feature, you can prepare a Pull Request with your own implementation of this feature.

[ari26squared]

I had a different impression on how to achieve this, which is why I suggested it to you. You know the way the library works better than I do.

I am also busy, but I will try making the change into a pull request (given your thoughts). You may beat me to it!

Thank you