Path: utzoo!mnetor!tmsoft!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!eve.usc.edu!mlinar
From: mlinar@eve.usc.edu (Mitch Mlinar)
Newsgroups: comp.os.cpm
Subject: Re: Kaypro II communications at high baud rates
Keywords: Kaypro Screen Clears Speed
Message-ID: <28989@usc>
Date: 22 Dec 90 02:06:22 GMT
References: <15766.2767c571@levels.sait.edu.au> <28971@usc> <1990Dec21.215841.23232@actrix.gen.nz>
Sender: news@usc
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
Lines: 24
Nntp-Posting-Host: eve.usc.edu

In article <1990Dec21.215841.23232@actrix.gen.nz> ewen@actrix.gen.nz (Ewen McNeill) writes:

## remember, but I think that consecutive screen-clears will ultimately cause
## a char to be dropped.
## 
#IMHO that is a little silly.  My terminal program (runs in the
#native mode of my CP/M machine) traps that.   I did this mostly
#because the screen is bit-mapped (16K) and takes _ages_ to clear
#(well, ages in processor time!).    Some of the BB systems I know
#(Opus particularly) send 3 or 4 clear screen sequences. 

#I would have thought that any reasonable bios/comms program would
#have the same trap.
#

No. Not true.  I don't know of any BIOSes in Kaypro/Xerox land that
trap multiple screen clears.  COMM programs (by and large) do not know
the clear screen sequence for the local terminal or, if they do, do
not check for repeating sequences.

Otherwise, I agree that multiple sequential screen clears are goofy and
unnecessary.

-Mitch