Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!unix.cis.pitt.edu!dsinc!netnews.upenn.edu!msuinfo!frith!dailey
From: dailey@frith.uucp (Chris Dailey)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech
Subject: Re: Pipes
Message-ID: <1990Jun14.151205.15611@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu>
Date: 14 Jun 90 15:12:05 GMT
References: <12391@cbmvax.commodore.com> <1990Jun7.215928.3826@cbnewsm.att.com> <5795@sugar.hackercorp.com> <1990Jun9.062243.24641@cbnewsm.att.com>
Sender: news@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu
Distribution: na
Organization: Michigan State University
Lines: 22

In article <1990Jun7.215928.3826@cbnewsm.att.com> nsw@cbnewsm.att.com (Neil Weinstock) writes:
> In an ideal world, one's shell should used the same type of line
> editing as one's editor.

Wouldn't it be nice if there were a number of editing 'tools' that were
available as libraries.  Then an editor could be written with a link to
that library (or any of a number of libraries) and your favorite shell
could be used with a link to the same library.  (I'm calling it a
library for want of a better word.)  Feaseable or not?  Maybe the shell
or word processor could define a number of other keystrokes that would
be processed by itself should a command be needed that goes beyond the
line limitation...?

Maybe the user's preference could be set in an environment variable that
the word processor and the shell take their cues from...?

Just thinkin' out loud.
--
  /~\  Chris Dailey   (CPS Undergrad, SOC Lab Coord, AMIG user group Secretary)
 C oo  dailey@(cpsin1.cps|frith.egr).msu.edu         (make WP5.1 for the Amiga)
 _( ^)   "I am thankful for one leg.  To limp is no disgrace --
/   ~\    I may not be number one, but I can still run the race." -from B.C.