Re: edt or vi?

Article View: comp.text

Article #3231

#3231

From: Spiros Triantafyllopoulos
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 1987 04:52

17 lines
1252 bytes

TPU does expect too much of terminals; I wrote an implementation of
MicroEMACS on TPU (using lots of DEC's EVE code in the process) and 
an awfull long part (including interfacing TPU with "C" (horror story))
went into tweaking the terminal to accept some vms-forbidden
control sequences. Then, the language does not have arrays (:-(),
can not do vertical split windows, and some other annoyances.

To its credit, TPU emacs is MUCH faster in scrolling/moving, and
because of underlying code (i.e. TPU itself) is very
robust. But... I switched to MicroEMACS 3.7i long ago...

spiros

-- 
Spiros Triantafyllopoulos
   spiros@ahxenix.uucp

Technical Details

Message-ID: <304@ahxenix.REL.COM>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!seismo!lll-lcc!ptsfa!well!msudoc!edstb!ahxenix!spiros

References: <241@tellab5.UUCP> <397@jimi.cs.unlv.edu> <10@hotlg.ATT>

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!seismo!lll-lcc!ptsfa!well!msudoc!edstb!ahxenix!spiros
From: spiros@ahxenix.REL.COM (Spiros Triantafyllopoulos)
Newsgroups: comp.text
Subject: Re: edt or vi?
Message-ID: <304@ahxenix.REL.COM>
Date: Sun, 11-Jan-87 23:52:29 EST
Article-I.D.: ahxenix.304
Posted: Sun Jan 11 23:52:29 1987
Date-Received: Tue, 13-Jan-87 23:38:38 EST
References: <241@tellab5.UUCP> <397@jimi.cs.unlv.edu> <10@hotlg.ATT>
Organization: Auburn Hills Xenix BBS
Lines: 17
Keywords: EDT sucks
Summary: TPU, intelligence, pain in the neck

Reply to Parent Message