Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!lll-crg!rutgers!dayton!viper!ddb
From: ddb@viper.UUCP (David Dyer_Bennet)
Newsgroups: comp.emacs
Subject: Re: What's wrong with flow control?
Message-ID: <402@viper.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 3-Dec-86 23:55:19 EST
Article-I.D.: viper.402
Posted: Wed Dec  3 23:55:19 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 3-Dec-86 06:31:17 EST
References: <3910001@nucsrl.UUCP> <388@viper.UUCP> <2518@phri.UUCP>
Reply-To: ddb@viper.UUCP (David Dyer_Bennet)
Organization: Lynx Data Systems, Minneapolis, MN
Lines: 21

In article <2518@phri.UUCP> roy@phri.UUCP (Roy Smith) writes:
>	Two problems with this.
>	The second problem is harder to get around.  Let's say you tell me
>that it's OK to send 15 characters now.  Does that mean 15 graphic (i.e.
>printable) characters, or can it include a "run confidence test" escape
>sequence which could take 5 minutes to complete?  That may be an extreme
>example, but consider than even a simple NL/CR with smooth-scroll turned on
>may take a good fraction of a second.
>-- 
>Roy Smith, {allegra,cmcl2,philabs}!phri!roy
It means specifically 15 (for example) BYTES OVER THE LINK.  The size is tied
to the ways things are buffered by the system giving permission.  Even if those
15 chars include a "run confidence test" (not by any means impossible in
the terminal environment I have in mind), since I had 15 chars of buffer space
available when I gave you that permission, I am guaranteed of being able to
handle the 15 chars you send, whatever they are.  Regardless of screen
representation or processing time required for them.  

The processing time issue is pretty much irrelevant, as far as I can see.
The sender will wait forever for the receiver to give permission for more
characters (thus introducing its own problems, if strictly interpreted...)