Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!jgreco From: jgreco@csd4.milw.wisc.edu (Joe Greco) Newsgroups: comp.sys.cbm Subject: Re: Desterm 128 Questions Message-ID: <2368@csd4.milw.wisc.edu> Date: 3 May 89 05:28:21 GMT References: <2091.244FF979@isishq.FIDONET.ORG> <2206@csd4.milw.wisc.edu> <1989Apr29.174422.4573@ziebmef.uucp> Sender: news@csd4.milw.wisc.edu Reply-To: jgreco@csd4.milw.wisc.edu (Joe Greco) Organization: Interstellar Telephone, Telegraph, and Telepath, Inc. Lines: 75 In comp.sys.cbm article <1989Apr29.174422.4573@ziebmef.uucp>, ross@ziebmef.UUCP (Ross Ridge) wrote: ]Well, I can probabably guess what the "problem" is. Most terminals ]tend to treat 7E and 8N the same way, they ignore the high order bit. ]My guess is that DesTerm, treats these differently and displays a ]special character for char's above 127. Your network maybe be 8N, but ]your host computer may still be using 7E (this is the case with the ]University of Waterloo's Sytek and Gandalf networks.). Wonderful, first thing I have to do is wade through the less than friendly communications parameters selection menus. heheheheh.... you may be right. ]Having written a terminal programme that can emulate the VT100 pretty ]well, I know how easy is it is to goof it up. Things like how handle ]ESC[r, end of line, scrolling, and host of other sometimes obvious ]looking items are easily botched. There are thousands of programmes out ]there that have failed to do it properly, so don't give Geoff too hard of ]a time. Which are all important. I do not appreciate bugs that cause me to lose data. On the other hand, I am also a software author and I *do* understand just how easy it is to botch things. I just do not appreciate seeing buggy software released. And why can't I give Geoff a rough time? It's almost fun to ruffle him a little. ;-) ]I used the ANSI X3.64-1979 standard to write my terminal programme ](it's an ANSI conforming terminal programme, with VT102 additios.) For ]VT102 emulation I actualy used a Rainbow manual. It turned out to be ]better than the VT series manuals I've seen. DEC always did have interesting manuals. ]>Forget "near perfect." Perfect is more important.... the last "near ]>perfect" emulation I used sometimes goofed up where the cursor should ]>be and I would mess up files while using my visual editor. HIGHLY ]>unsatisfactory. ] ]Perfect emulation isn't really needed, the full VT100/102 command set ]need not be implimented, but the ones that are have to be done perfectly. ]My own terminal which leaves out a fair bit, works perfectly with Unix ](at least anything that uses termcap/terminfo), because it knows what ]to do at the end of a line, not because it supports double ]height/width characters. I'm not asking for dh/dw characters. I'm also not asking for LED status indicators (especially when the basics are still buggy). If my local UNIX can know where my cursor is at all times, I will be happy. This is not a heck of a lot to ask when using error correcting modems on both ends. In other words, I agree. On the other hand, the more implemented, the better. I have vt100 termcap entries that will make my visual editor crawl because certain features are not listed as "implemented," and others that implement a few "special" features and make things fly. But only if the emulator emulates them. :-) ]P.S. I'm not really trying to "push" my own terminal. I don't ]distribute it, nor do I think it's a perfect VT100 termnial, it's just ]a programme I wrote because there is nothing for a 64 with a BI-80. What do you call C64KERMIT? It works very well with a BI-80, thank you very much (and I wouldn't try a VT100 emulation on a 64 without it, although KERMIT does an admirable job trying.... just can't keep up). By the way, has anybody successfully make c64kermit run at 2400bps? -- jgreco@csd4.milw.wisc.edu Joe Greco at FidoNet 1:154/200 USnail: 9905 W Montana Ave PunterNet Node 30 or 31 West Allis, WI 53227-3329 "These aren't anybody's opinions." Voice: 414/321-6184 Data: 414/321-9287 (Happy Hacker's BBS)