Re: advance=no problem

Gary Scott <garylscott@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

You can overwrite what has previously been sent. There is no
requirement to unsend, only to control where the subsequent write
begins. Terminals can do that, but more importantly terminal emulations
in the form of console windows can do that. No need to write a device
driver for every possible device. The CVF/IVF original implementation
behaved as I would have preferred.

All of which sounds like you are looking for something that has
essentially nothing to do with any of the things that advance='no',and
for that matter, tabbing, was designed for or speced for. Tabbing around
in a record to "overwrite" previous stuff in the record essentially
*DOES* unsend, at least if you do it within a single format (i.e. before
it is physically sent). It simply is not the same thing as writing a
record and then overwriting part of it. The tabbing changes what the
record is in the first place before it is ever sent. That's what the
model of tabbing is like. Looks to me like you are looking for a
terminal control feature. You can do that (with terminal control
sequences, preferably suitably abstracted), but that's not what tabbing
was designed for. No great surprise that it doesn't do it. As in my
comment

I'll also
claim it is pretty typical of a class of debate where someone tries
to take a feature designed for one purpose and modify it for a
completely different purpose, even if that breaks its use for the
original purpose;

Advance='no' was for prompting and for supporting records larger than
the system buffer sizes. Making it act like you appear to want would
break both of those things that it was for in order to turn it into
something that it wasn't for.

I frankly don't figure it worth debating much because I'd say that the
odds of such a change getting enough support to go anywhere are
negligable. I doubt the user community would accept it, and I'd be at
least slightly surprised if you managed to get a second on the committee
for such a proposal, particularly as it would be explicitly incompatible
with what the standard currently says. It tends to require an extra high
degree of support to make such incompatible changes.

In general, if you want a new feature, it is a lot easier to propose a
new feature than to grab onto an existing one and propose that it be
changed to do something completely different and incompatible with what
it already does. I do see a lot of proposals like that; they tend to go
nowehere.

--
Richard Maine | Good judgement comes from experience;
email: last name at domain . net | experience comes from bad judgement.
domain: summertriangle | -- Mark Twain
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: HELP! Onan Emerald III No AC
    ... While it was running I did check the terminals on the back of the electric ... have welded together (K2 is energized by the battery charge windings, ... control board does, ... jumper lead from the battery terminal at the solenoid to the control box ...
    (rec.outdoors.rv-travel)
  • Re: Guishell project looking for collaborators
    ... If it should be more limiting (to not shock a Windows migrant), ... a single shell interpreter is stupid from the security perspective. ... This causes a problem with resizing terminals. ... to see how to freely control cursor movement and text output. ...
    (comp.unix.programmer)
  • Re: where use all three terminals on a potentiometer?
    ... haven't used the three terminals all at the same time. ... connect the output of your preamp stage to the 'top' of the pot, connect the 'bottom' to ground, and take the audio off of the tap. ... Similarly, if you want to use a potentiometer for a position feedback, you would power the top and bottom terminals with either +V and ground, or +V and -V, and take the position reading off of the tap. ... "Applied Control Theory for Embedded Systems" gives you just what it says. ...
    (sci.electronics.basics)
  • Re: Help with electric guitar pots problems?
    ... This is how the guitar seems to be wired: ... One terminal on the 3-way pickup selector is connected to one ... connected to one terminal of the neck volume control. ... The middle terminals of the kill switch are connected to the metal side-body ...
    (sci.electronics.repair)
  • Re: Serial port: open vs fcntl
    ... >CLOCAL Ignore modem control lines. ... For example most RS-232 terminals simply do not ... >signals, and also that the serial interface driver will read incoming ...
    (comp.unix.programmer)