Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!apollo!apollo.hp.com!kumorek
From: kumorek@apollo.HP.COM (James Kumorek)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apollo
Subject: Re: DM in OSF
Message-ID: <519489f9.20b6d@apollo.HP.COM>
Date: 15 May 91 16:55:00 GMT
References: <9105081641.AA28800@cel.cummins.com> <1130004@hpcndjdz.CND.HP.COM>
Sender: root@apollo.HP.COM
Reply-To: kumorek@apollo.HP.COM (James Kumorek)
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Apollo Division - Chelmsford, MA
Lines: 26

In article <1130004@hpcndjdz.CND.HP.COM>, jason@hpcndjdz.CND.HP.COM
(Jason Zions) writes:
|> I admit to only passing knowledge of the use of the DM, so bear with me for
|> one tyro question. Could you explain what editing features you'd like that
|> you can't get with ksh in an xterm or hpterm window with a good cut-buffer
|> manager? 

The primary difference between DM input pads and ksh command line editing
is the dm input pads lets you edit the input to *any* program running in
the pad, not just the input to ksh.  The editing is done in the dm, not in the 
program that is running in the pad.

This gives you the added benefit that input editing (and file editing as well)
uses a common interface, no matter what program you are running.

The primary disadvantage to DM pads (as I see it) is that it is not a terminal
emulator or any kind, thus programs that use curses (for example) will not
run correctly if you have 'rsh | telnet | rlogin | crp' to another machine.

Others undoubtably have other opinions on that the 'best' and 'wrost'
features of
the DM are.

Jim Kumorek
Apollo Computer, Inc. - A subsidiary of Hewlett Packard
kumorek@apollo.hp.com