🚀 go-pugleaf

On 26 Jan 1993 08:04:13 GMT twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce) said:
>In article <9301250854.AA01628@SERVER.uwindsor.ca> ophof@SERVER.uwindsor.ca (Scott Ophof) writes:
>>Now when user X invokes application A, the "translator" will
>>interpose itself between user & the application, and use table A1.
>>When User Z invokes application A, table A3 will be used (if user Z
>>built one, of course).
>This would probably work.  It might be something of a resource hog,
>however, and would require Sisyphian labors of configuration.

Betcha that such translate tables would be passed along to others,
thus reducing the work for many users.
Also, commands not redefined need not be included in the file;
they would just default.
There's of course no need to read the table each time a command is
given; read-once-at-invocation, and build a table in-memory for
reference purposes.
Another possibility would be to ONE translate table for a number of
applications, with (let's say) the first line like this:

   cmd = elm = trn = tin = ftp = telnet [..]

And the following lines would list the relevant translations, with a
blank meaning the default, and some (special) char meaning "not
supported"?  In other words, when "trn" is invoked, it would only
pick up the first and the third columns (in this example)...

Heck, maybe the translations could be compiled in, once a user was
satisfied enough?

Regards.
$$\    F. Scott Ophof

--------------------------->  I speak *only* for *myself*  <-----
My credo:  Computers exist for OUR benefit, NEVER vice-versa.