Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!rutgers!sri-spam!mordor!lll-tis!ptsfa!ihnp4!cbosgd!cblpf!cbstr1!Karl.Kleinpaste
From: Karl.Kleinpaste@cbstr1.att.com
Newsgroups: comp.emacs
Subject: Re: 9600 baud problems
Message-ID: <283@cbstr1.att.com>
Date: Fri, 26-Jun-87 08:35:21 EDT
Article-I.D.: cbstr1.283
Posted: Fri Jun 26 08:35:21 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 27-Jun-87 10:33:41 EDT
References: <1149@carthage.swatsun.UUCP> <8601@tekecs.TEK.COM>
Sender: karl@cbstr1.att.com
Lines: 28
In-reply-to: dave@astra.necisa.oz's message of 24 Jun 87 07:42:57 GMT

Posting-Front-End: GNU Emacs 18.47.3 of Sat Jun 20 1987 on cbstr1 (usg-unix-v)


dave@astra.necisa.oz writes:
   It occurs to me that if EMACS uses ^S (a character universally accepted
   to mean STOP SENDING ME CHARACTERS!) as a command, then perhaps EMACS
   is just ever so slightly brain damaged.  Why shouldn't the terminal
   (or the user for that matter) send ^S if it wants to?  What do you
   think the NO-SCROLL key does?

[a] ^S is *not* universally accepted as a stop-send command.  I never
use it as such.  Many people I know avoid it completely.  My stty
options disable it entirely.  I use terminals on which I can stop
output by other means (notably, mouse-menu commands), or I pipe
massive amounts of output through a suitable pager (more or pg).

[b] The set of terminals with a no-scroll key is not all that large.
The one vt102 I use regularly is set so that the no-scroll key is a
no-op.

[c] The terminal shouldn't send ^S/^Q as flow control because there's
positively no reason for designing a terminal incapable of keeping up
at high baud rates.

   Why did EMACS choose to redefine ^S anyway?

It is arguable that Emacs didn't choose to "redefine" it, but rather
that the conventions regarding ^S-as-search and ^S-as-stop developed
at similar times in different places.

Karl