Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!bellcore!faline!thumper!ulysses!andante!mit-eddie!ll-xn!ames!amdcad!amdahl!acs
From: acs@amdahl.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech
Subject: Re: What about the serial port IPC discussion?
Message-ID: <32412@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com>
Date: 19 May 88 06:10:01 GMT
References: <30731@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com> <856@imagine.PAWL.RPI.EDU> <31046@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com> <5255@cup.portal.com> <31774@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com> <5500@cup.portal.com>
Reply-To: acs@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com (Tony Sumrall)
Distribution: na
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA
Lines: 12
Posted: Thu May 19 02:10:01 1988

In article <5500@cup.portal.com> doug-merritt@cup.portal.com writes:
>Tony, I understand and agree with your examples about multiple
>readers being a good thing (e.g. funneling ascii capture off to
>another process).

Good deal, Doug.  So, does unanimity of a party of 2 mean that this is a
"good thing"?  Should we (have we) asked C-A to implement this?
-- 
Tony Sumrall acs@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com <=> amdahl!acs

[ Opinions expressed herein are the author's and should not be construed
  to reflect the views of Amdahl Corp. ]