CompuServe Thread

Forum unknown · Telecommunications

#comm/vt100/printscreen

15 messages in this thread
#133122From: Ben BlishJul 4, 1988 12:26 AM
It's also the right way to do it. Which explains why CBM didn't do it that way. :^\
#133175From: RON TROYJul 4, 1988 12:31 PM
Read what I told Don – if Online! only handles text, why can't such a program remember what it has done (it does have a review buffer) that you can have print control over? Ron
#133224From: Don Curtis/SYSOPJul 4, 1988 5:42 PM
Ron, You do have the print buffer command. Don
#133257From: RON TROYJul 4, 1988 10:59 PM
To use it I have to turn on the buffer ahead of time, and I might not know that I'll need it. I want a hot key setup to print the screen, a control print to turn printing on in a standard way (not just the commands/mouse use as now) and full host control of these functions in the standard vt102 + manner. Ron
#133271From: Don Curtis/SYSOPJul 5, 1988 12:33 AM
Ron, You've got a review buffer that is on ALL the time. Hit Right Amiga V. I don't understand why you are having problems….works fine for me. Don
#133271From: Don Curtis/SYSOPJul 5, 1988 12:33 AM
Ron, You've got a review buffer that is on ALL the time. Hit Right Amiga V. I don't understand why you are having problems….works fine for me. Don
#133257From: RON TROYJul 4, 1988 10:59 PM
To use it I have to turn on the buffer ahead of time, and I might not know that I'll need it. I want a hot key setup to print the screen, a control print to turn printing on in a standard way (not just the commands/mouse use as now) and full host control of these functions in the standard vt102 + manner. Ron
#133224From: Don Curtis/SYSOPJul 4, 1988 5:42 PM
Ron, You do have the print buffer command. Don
#133299From: Ben BlishJul 5, 1988 1:19 AM
Design/implementation penalties. What can I say? CoComm also maintains a review buffer in text… but I didn't give you print control over that, either. Then again, no one ever asked for it. <shrug> –Ben–
#133299From: Ben BlishJul 5, 1988 1:19 AM
Design/implementation penalties. What can I say? CoComm also maintains a review buffer in text… but I didn't give you print control over that, either. Then again, no one ever asked for it. <shrug> –Ben–
#133175From: RON TROYJul 4, 1988 12:31 PM
Read what I told Don – if Online! only handles text, why can't such a program remember what it has done (it does have a review buffer) that you can have print control over? Ron
#133287From: Vic WagnerJul 5, 1988 12:49 AM
On this one your dead wrong.
#133301From: Ben BlishJul 5, 1988 1:33 AM
No, I'm not. I've written several _very_ complete terminals, some that were emulations and some that were actually hardware terminals, no other purpose in life. I maintain that you _must_ keep a record around of what is in the screen – maintaining things _only_ in a bit map is an extremely shortsighted thing to do. If you choose that, you can't: Print screen Cut/paste _temporarily_ hide portions of the display cursor around the screen attach "action" attributes (Like blink, register-shift…) local edit without going to "hacks". Like command line buffers. Like SnipIt. Like SuperBitmaps (Great, but costly in memory) like special attribute maps, and as for local editing, only on the current line. Line oriented displays are OLD tech. Screen oriented ones came in years ago. Not that I'm a fan of the keyboard, but if I _have_ to use the darn thing, I don't want to use a "glass teletype". I'm not wrong. You haven't thought it thru, is what, I think. I've never said that ONLY text is what you want. We need what we have, AND the internal availability of a textual/attribute record so we can work with it, too. Furthermore, that record should be accessable to external programs. And as I have said before, in term of performance – I know what I'm talking about. I've been quite deep into graphics, into terminal and terminal emulation design, and the Amiga console isn't all that hot. I could fix it – if I had the source. –Ben–
#133301From: Ben BlishJul 5, 1988 1:33 AM
No, I'm not. I've written several _very_ complete terminals, some that were emulations and some that were actually hardware terminals, no other purpose in life. I maintain that you _must_ keep a record around of what is in the screen – maintaining things _only_ in a bit map is an extremely shortsighted thing to do. If you choose that, you can't: Print screen Cut/paste _temporarily_ hide portions of the display cursor around the screen attach "action" attributes (Like blink, register-shift…) local edit without going to "hacks". Like command line buffers. Like SnipIt. Like SuperBitmaps (Great, but costly in memory) like special attribute maps, and as for local editing, only on the current line. Line oriented displays are OLD tech. Screen oriented ones came in years ago. Not that I'm a fan of the keyboard, but if I _have_ to use the darn thing, I don't want to use a "glass teletype". I'm not wrong. You haven't thought it thru, is what, I think. I've never said that ONLY text is what you want. We need what we have, AND the internal availability of a textual/attribute record so we can work with it, too. Furthermore, that record should be accessable to external programs. And as I have said before, in term of performance – I know what I'm talking about. I've been quite deep into graphics, into terminal and terminal emulation design, and the Amiga console isn't all that hot. I could fix it – if I had the source. –Ben–
#133287From: Vic WagnerJul 5, 1988 12:49 AM
On this one your dead wrong.