various: fix newline spam on load#19
Draft
plumj-am wants to merge 1 commit into
Draft
Conversation
Signed-off-by: PlumJam <git@plumj.am>
Contributor
Author
|
It still appears to be an issue, though maybe less frequent? Can't be sure. I'll keep digging. |
Contributor
|
should be fixed on |
Contributor
Author
|
I don't think the terminal size is the only issue. I occasionally encountered it on large (>120 column) terminals too where the width was plenty for cade. Perhaps that issue is fixed by my change because it hasn't happened since. It's difficult when these things happen so intermittently... Anyway, I'm sure can get to the bottom of it :) |
Contributor
Author
|
Yes, even using my patched version, I still get this. 190 columns so shouldn't be width constrained @atagen:
|
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.

It doesn't happen every time and I wasn't able to figure out exactly why it did. However, it is fixed by this change. Now the status updates re-use the same line which I assume is the intention.
Before (shortened but it was about twice this length):
After: