I was thinking that this helper could replace the current one for choice questions only whenstty is available. This could be done by renamingQuestionHelper intoGenericQuestionHelper for example, and then creating a newQuestionHelper that just proxies the other two:

publicfunctionask(InputInterface$input,OutputInterface$output,Question$question){if ($this->hasSttyAvailable() &&$questioninstanceof ChoiceQuestion) {return$this->helperSet->get('choice_question')           ->ask($input,$output,$question);   }return$this->helperSet->get('generic_question')       ->ask($input,$output,$question);}

IMO, it does not mak sense to have a separate helper for choice questions. It makes things harder to use for developers, by requiring to choose the right helper (or they will always use thequestion helper they already know, and users will not benefit from the better experience).
The enhanced experience should be implemented in the QuestionHelper directly (using the existing logic when you don't have stty)

I didn't put it in theQuestionHelper because I feared it becomes a mess with the different handlings (for example they write the questions and choices differently). On the other side the choice question handling is mostly done by theSingleChoiceQuestionAsker and theMultiChoiceQuestionAsker.

What I could do is to put the default handling fromhttps://github.com/symfony/symfony/blob/master/src/Symfony/Component/Console/Helper/QuestionHelper.php#L110 in a separate command likeGenericQuestionAsker to keep theQuestionHelper clean. It will choose the appropriateAsker depending on the type of question and ifstty is available and use that directly.

What do you think@stof ?

I have updated the PR, so it keeps only theQuestionHelper and uses the new way whenstty is available and it's a choice question. I have also completed the tests.

Btw, it would be nice if someone withoutstty could run the tests.

What do you think about this PR ?@fabpot@stof

This is a great addition, a much better way to give answers, user-friendly 👍

👍

Thanks for reviewing@stof, I have addressed your comments

👍

Any new about this PR@fabpot@stof ?

@ro0NL Probably one that you could be interested in taking over :)

I guess, this PR could be closed after#26698.