starred/terminal
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/microsoft/terminal.git synced 2026-02-04 05:35:20 +00:00
Code Issues 19.0k Packages Projects Releases 20 Wiki Activity

Merge the legacy and extended attributes #18501

New Issue
Closed
opened 2026-01-31 06:15:57 +00:00 by claunia · 4 comments
claunia commented 2026-01-31 06:15:57 +00:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @j4james on GitHub (Sep 18, 2022).

Description of the new feature/enhancement

In order to implement #14029, there was a need to add another bit in the ExtendedAttributes enum, and it occurred to me while looking at that code that it might be a good time to do something refactoring there first.

At the moment we've got two attribute fields in the TextAttribute class: _wAttrLegacy, which only uses 5 of its available 16 bits; and _extendedAttrs, which uses 8 of its available 16 bits. If we merged the two together into a single 16-bit field, we'd still have 3 bits to spare, and the TextAttribute class would be two bytes smaller.

Proposed technical implementation details (optional)

The idea would be to drop the legacy attributes, and replace the existing ExtendedAttributes enum with something like this:

enum class CharacterAttributes : uint16_t
{
    Normal = 0x00,
    Intense = 0x01,
    Italics = 0x02,
    Blinking = 0x04,
    Invisible = 0x08,
    CrossedOut = 0x10,
    Underlined = 0x20,
    DoublyUnderlined = 0x40,
    Faint = 0x80,
    Unused1 = 0x100,
    Unused2 = 0x200,
    TopGridline = COMMON_LVB_GRID_HORIZONTAL, // 0x400
    LeftGridline = COMMON_LVB_GRID_LVERTICAL, // 0x800
    RightGridline = COMMON_LVB_GRID_RVERTICAL, // 0x1000
    Unused3 = 0x2000,
    ReverseVideo = COMMON_LVB_REVERSE_VIDEO, // 0x4000
    BottomGridline = COMMON_LVB_UNDERSCORE // 0x8000
};

The added legacy bits are in the exact same position they were in the original field, so when initializing the TextAttribute class from a legacy value, we just have to mask out the relevant bits and write them directly to this field. Same approach works when converting from a TextAttribute back to a legacy value.

What do you think? Can I put together a PR with this change?

Originally created by @j4james on GitHub (Sep 18, 2022). # Description of the new feature/enhancement In order to implement #14029, there was a need to add another bit in the `ExtendedAttributes` enum, and it occurred to me while looking at that code that it might be a good time to do something refactoring there first. At the moment we've got two attribute fields in the `TextAttribute` class: `_wAttrLegacy`, which only uses 5 of its available 16 bits; and `_extendedAttrs`, which uses 8 of its available 16 bits. If we merged the two together into a single 16-bit field, we'd still have 3 bits to spare, and the `TextAttribute` class would be two bytes smaller. # Proposed technical implementation details (optional) The idea would be to drop the legacy attributes, and replace the existing [`ExtendedAttributes`](https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/blob/0d17769b89a77991ac26f3b24596c4262d9f9332/src/inc/conattrs.hpp#L11-L22) enum with something like this: ```cpp enum class CharacterAttributes : uint16_t { Normal = 0x00, Intense = 0x01, Italics = 0x02, Blinking = 0x04, Invisible = 0x08, CrossedOut = 0x10, Underlined = 0x20, DoublyUnderlined = 0x40, Faint = 0x80, Unused1 = 0x100, Unused2 = 0x200, TopGridline = COMMON_LVB_GRID_HORIZONTAL, // 0x400 LeftGridline = COMMON_LVB_GRID_LVERTICAL, // 0x800 RightGridline = COMMON_LVB_GRID_RVERTICAL, // 0x1000 Unused3 = 0x2000, ReverseVideo = COMMON_LVB_REVERSE_VIDEO, // 0x4000 BottomGridline = COMMON_LVB_UNDERSCORE // 0x8000 }; ``` The added legacy bits are in the exact same position they were in the original field, so when initializing the `TextAttribute` class from a legacy value, we just have to mask out the relevant bits and write them directly to this field. Same approach works when converting from a `TextAttribute` back to a legacy value. What do you think? Can I put together a PR with this change?
claunia commented 2026-01-31 06:15:58 +00:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@lhecker commented on GitHub (Sep 19, 2022):

I've considered merging them as well in the past, but simply haven't had time for it yet. I like it. 👍

@lhecker commented on GitHub (Sep 19, 2022): I've considered merging them as well in the past, but simply haven't had time for it yet. I like it. 👍
claunia commented 2026-01-31 06:15:59 +00:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@DHowett commented on GitHub (Sep 19, 2022):

This shouldn't impact our ability to expand it to 32 bits later, right?

As long as none of the legacy API operations are impacted (either by gaining new unexpected abilities or by losing them,) I'm totally cool with it. Thanks for proposing!

@DHowett commented on GitHub (Sep 19, 2022): This shouldn't impact our ability to expand it to 32 bits later, right? As long as none of the legacy API operations are impacted (either by gaining new unexpected abilities or by losing them,) I'm totally cool with it. Thanks for proposing!
claunia commented 2026-01-31 06:15:59 +00:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@j4james commented on GitHub (Sep 19, 2022):

This shouldn't impact our ability to expand it to 32 bits later, right?

I don't think so. We may have to reorder the fields to get the alignment right, but that shouldn't be an issue.

As long as none of the legacy API operations are impacted

Yeah, they shouldn't be. The code which handles the conversion to and from legacy attributes is almost identical to what it was before.

@j4james commented on GitHub (Sep 19, 2022): > This shouldn't impact our ability to expand it to 32 bits later, right? I don't think so. We may have to reorder the fields to get the alignment right, but that shouldn't be an issue. > As long as none of the legacy API operations are impacted Yeah, they shouldn't be. The code which handles the conversion to and from legacy attributes is almost identical to what it was before.
claunia commented 2026-01-31 06:15:59 +00:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@ghost commented on GitHub (Jan 24, 2023):

:tada:This issue was addressed in #14036, which has now been successfully released as Windows Terminal Preview v1.17.1023.🎉

Handy links:

@ghost commented on GitHub (Jan 24, 2023): :tada:This issue was addressed in #14036, which has now been successfully released as `Windows Terminal Preview v1.17.1023`.:tada: Handy links: * [Release Notes](https://github.com/microsoft/terminal/releases/tag/v1.17.1023) * [Store Download](https://www.microsoft.com/store/apps/9n8g5rfz9xk3?cid=storebadge&ocid=badge)
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag Specified
Branches Tags
Labels
Clear labels
⛺ Reserved
A11yCO
A11yMAS
A11ySev1
A11ySev2
A11ySev3
A11yTTValidated
A11yUsable
A11yVoiceAccess
A11yWCAG
Area-Accessibility
Area-AtlasEngine
Area-AzureShell
Area-Build
Area-Build
Area-Chat
Area-CmdPal
Area-CodeHealth
Area-Commandline
Area-CookedRead
Area-DefApp
Area-Extensibility
Area-Fonts
Area-GroupPolicy
Area-i18n
Area-Input
Area-Interaction
Area-Interop
Area-Localization
Area-Output
Area-Performance
Area-Portable
Area-Quality
Area-Remoting
Area-Rendering
Area-Schema
Area-Server
Area-Settings
Area-SettingsUI
Area-ShellExtension
Area-ShellExtension
Area-ShellExtension
Area-Suggestions
Area-Suggestions
Area-TerminalConnection
Area-TerminalControl
Area-Theming
Area-UserInterface
Area-VT
Area-Windowing
Area-WPFControl
AutoMerge
Blocking-Ingestion
Culprit-Centennial
Culprit-WinUI
Disability-All
Disability-Blind
Disability-LowVision
Disability-Mobility
External-Blocked-WinUI3
Fixed
Gathering-Data
good first issue
HCL-E+D
HCL-WindowsTerminal
Help Wanted
Impact-Compatibility
Impact-Compliance
Impact-Correctness
Impact-Visual
In-PR
InclusionBacklog
InclusionBacklog-Windows TerminalWin32
InclusionCommitted-202206
Issue-Bug
Issue-Docs
Issue-Feature
Issue-Feature
Issue-Question
Issue-Samples
Issue-Scenario
Issue-Task
Needs-Attention
Needs-Author-Feedback
Needs-Bisect
Needs-Discussion
Needs-Repro
Needs-Tag-Fix
Needs-Tag-Fix
Needs-Triage
No-Recent-Activity
Priority-0
Priority-1
Priority-2
Priority-3
Product-Cmd.exe
Product-Colortool
Product-Colortool
Product-Colortool
Product-Conhost
Product-Conpty
Product-Meta
Product-Powershell
Product-Terminal
Product-WSL
pull-request
Mirrored from GitHub Pull Request
 Resolution-Answered
Resolution-By-Design
Resolution-Duplicate
Resolution-External
Resolution-Fix-Available
Resolution-Fix-Committed
Resolution-No-Repro
Resolution-Won't-Fix
Severity-Blocking
Severity-Crash
Severity-DataLoss
spam
this-will-be-a-breaking-change
Tracking-External
WindowsTerminal_Win32
Work-Item
zAskModeBug
zInbox-Bug
No Label Area-CodeHealth Area-Output Issue-Task Needs-Tag-Fix Needs-Triage Resolution-Fix-Committed
Milestone
No items
No Milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
claunia
No Assignees
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: starred/terminal#18501
Delete Branch "%!s()"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?