Re: ^O in EMACS

Jim Budler (eda!
5 Nov 88 11:03:25 GMT

In article <> (David Herron -- One of the vertebrae) writes:
>The flippant response (to the question about why any application
>would use funny characters) is that if the system doesn't allow
>The non-flippant reasponse is "why not?". Also, what's so standard
>about, for instance, ^O. Yeah some operating systems use that for
>special purposes, but nowhere near all of them. What's so "standard"

[but somewhere near a lot of them]

>about ^S/^Q (another pair which causes headaches for emacs). For
>one thing it's not standard, but it's also rather braindead to have
>a system which uses in-band signaling to do flow control. Not only
>is it slow and error prone, it decreases the "bandwidth".
OK, I'll give you ^O, but g-d d--n it ^S/^Q, if not a NIC, IEEE, OSI
or any organisation approved *standard* predates by YEARS any
implementation of Emacs. Ignoring it's existence in a predominent
portion of the existing hardware was a philosophical, or even religious
choice. Who cares if the philosophical idea is that in-band signals
should not be used. When Emacs was developed, they were already
nearly 100% in use. The original computer terminal, the original
teletype terminal, used them. The decision to ignore that, for a
philisophical reason, was STUPID. Is that too mild? The decision
was arogant, uncaring, stupid, assinine, wanton, petty, and many
other adjectives.

For instance: I have a 19.2K modem. My computer cannot take input
at that rate. I have two choices. Use vi, or set my interface rate
below my modem rate. F**k. When they developed emacs they could
have chosen other keys. They cannot have *not* known the majority
of the world was using ^S/^Q at that time. Sitting back and
saying hardware, please note that, I said hardware, including
terminals, data concentrators, modems was brain dead for using
in band signals so therefor Emacs will ignore this reality
and force you to buy better hardware is AROGANT, STUPID,

My G*D! Hardware predating the computers Emacs was developed on
used ^S/^Q for the exact purpose hardware is using it for today.
Are the only standards we work from those that are blessed
by ARPA. Western Union was here BEFORE ARPA. ARPA doesn't even
call them standards, they call them 'Request For Comment'. Now
days they don't even call them that, someone might comment. Now
they call them 'IDEAS'.

I like Emacs. But when I run into the *frequent* situation where
the hardware doesn't allow it, I don't say 'Damn hardware', I say
******* ******* Stallman.

He was WRONG. The use of ^S/^Q was WELL ESTABLISHED, even if no
standards body had bothered to write it up. They probably didn't
think it needed, because any ******* would notice it was prevalent.

Like I said, I'll grudgingly give you ^O, but I wont give you ^S/^Q.
Why grudgingly? Because people who write *portable* code observe
things that effect their *portable* code. ^O is common on *many*
operating systems, it's called flush output.

It was wrong!!!!!!!! I don't care if it is in band, I mean, gag me
with a spoon, 7 bit is stupid, too.

Send me flames. That way I'll know the UUCP links are working.

uucp:	  {decwrl,uunet}!eda!jim	Jim Budler
internet:			EDA Systems, Inc.

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu Mar 09 2000 - 14:43:58 GMT