Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!auspex!guy
From: guy@auspex.auspex.com (Guy Harris)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: POSIX bashing
Message-ID: <7195@auspex.auspex.com>
Date: 16 Apr 91 02:00:40 GMT
References: <3478@unisoft.UUCP> <71479@brunix.UUCP> <1991Apr11.021532.20574@mtxinu.COM>
Organization: Auspex Systems, Santa Clara
Lines: 18

>No, it's not better to get it out of the kernel, unless you propose
>linking the *same* interface into *every* application.

Well, I suspect that's what some *are* proposing - either linking it
into every application (although perhaps doing so dynamically, and
transparently, so that anybody who does a cooked-mode "read()" from a
tty gets the data passed through that code), or sticking it in front of
the tty as a pty-based front end.

>I want consistency among the tools I use.  I most certainly do not want
>to remember which applications have fancy input editing built in
>and which don't.

I'm not sure *I* wouldn't want it.  Most of the cooked-mode typing I do
is to a shell, and I found it not to be a real problem to have a whizzy
editor only in "ksh".  Maybe it wouldn't be a problem having "ksh"s
input editing code in wired-down kernel code, and maybe it wouldn't be
wired down, but....