Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!jarthur!usc!snorkelwacker!paperboy!meissner From: meissner@osf.org (Michael Meissner) Newsgroups: comp.lang.c Subject: Re: getting a key from stdin in UNIX Message-ID: Date: 12 Feb 90 16:32:01 GMT References: <2802@cunixc.cc.columbia.edu> <22287@mimsy.umd.edu> <7184@arcturus> <11961@frog.UUCP> Sender: news@OSF.ORG Organization: Open Software Foundation Lines: 26 In-reply-to: john@frog.UUCP's message of 9 Feb 90 07:13:00 GMT In article <11961@frog.UUCP> john@frog.UUCP (John Woods) writes: | In article , peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) writes: | > In article <22352@mimsy.umd.edu> chris@mimsy.umd.edu (Chris Torek) writes: | > > >Try using curses .... | > > Oddly enough, curses does not exist on Univac 1100 systems running EXEC-8 | > I think it's quite appropriate, since curses is likely to be available to | > the majority of C programmers reading this list. | | And most interestingly, the Berkeley curses implementation is available | under the new Berkeley Copyright (i.e., use it, enjoy it, thank us if you | sell it), so if EXEC-8 CAN support curses, there is no excuse for it | not to have it. That may be, but I doubt that BSD curses would be all that ameniable to running on EXEC-8. BSD curses assumes 8 bit bytes and 7 bit display. The last time I used EXEC-8 (oh, about 15 years ago), it used 9 bit bytes (since the Univac computers are 36 bit machines). Also, I suspect BSD curses assumes 2's complement arithmetic, and the Univac computers used 1's complement arithmetic (ie, -1 did not set all 1 bits, -0 did). -- Michael Meissner email: meissner@osf.org phone: 617-621-8861 Open Software Foundation, 11 Cambridge Center, Cambridge, MA Catproof is an oxymoron, Childproof is nearly so