Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!cmcl2!brl-adm!adm!jones%cs.uiowa.edu@RELAY.CS.NET From: jones%cs.uiowa.edu@RELAY.CS.NET (Douglas Jones) Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions Subject: What became of QED Message-ID: <10512@brl-adm.ARPA> Date: Tue, 24-Nov-87 01:35:56 EST Article-I.D.: brl-adm.10512 Posted: Tue Nov 24 01:35:56 1987 Date-Received: Fri, 27-Nov-87 00:27:24 EST Sender: news@brl-adm.ARPA Lines: 31 As a long-time UNIX user who has used many of the predecessor systems on which (or should I say from which) UNIX developed, I have noticed that the ED editor (and descendants such as EX and brothers such as SED) have not got the general regular expression facility of some of their predecessors. In Ritchie and Thompson's version of QED, one could name a regular expression e(name)/expression/ and then use it in other expressions such as /regular \E(name)/ which would match the string "regular expression". I've recently written a grinder for Pascal programs in LaTeX documents, and this would have made things easier (the grinder is written in SED). By way of history, QED was originally written by Deutsch and Lampson back on the Berkeley Timesharing System (they published a CACM paper on it in Dec. 1967). Ken Thompson did a version of QED on MULTICS, (the tech report came out before the Deutsch and Lampson's paper), and Ritchie and Thompson did a version on the Murray Hill GCOS Timesharing System in 1970. ED on UNIX is a scaled back version of the GCOS QED editor, while SED puts back some of the QED features that ED dropped, but abandons the possibility of interactive use. I've used QED on the Berkeley system in 1968, and on the Murray Hill GCOS system in 1974. Does anyone know why Ritchie and Thompson dropped the features they did when they made QED into ED on UNIX? If the reason was memory capacity, now that most UNIX systems have capacity, why hasn't anyone put these features back into text processing tools such as SED? Douglas W. Jones jones@cs.uiowa.edu (csnet)