Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site wjh12.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!vaxine!wjh12!kendall
From: kendall@wjh12.UUCP (Sam Kendall)
Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards,net.bugs
Subject: Berkeley terminal driver user interface
Message-ID: <449@wjh12.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 11-Apr-84 23:10:08 EST
Article-I.D.: wjh12.449
Posted: Wed Apr 11 23:10:08 1984
Date-Received: Thu, 12-Apr-84 05:29:35 EST
References: <249@basser.SUN>
Organization: Delft Consulting Corp., New York
Lines: 21

Several people have condemned the Berkeley terminal driver, saying that
it is large and complicated.  A couple have grudgingly admitted their
liking for the terminal interface (but, as Mark Horton says, not for the
ioctl interface).

I think more praise is due the user interface.  It is a good thing for a
computer program to be simple outside (specification) and simple inside
(implementation); but a computer is used best when a program is simple
outside but complex inside--the user sees the simplicity, and the
computer takes care of the complexity.  In this case the program is the
terminal driver and the outside is the terminal interface.  The terminal
interface may be the best possible given intra-line backspacing only,
and very simple from the human point of view; the complexity of the
implementation is no worry of mine.

On the other hand, I refuse to defend the ioctl interface.  And I
agree with the more general criticisms of BSD; but I think the terminal
interface of the terminal driver is a notable exception.

	Sam Kendall	{allegra,ihnp4,ima,amd70}!wjh12!kendall
	Delft Consulting Corp.	    decvax!genrad!wjh12!kendall