Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!ut-sally!husc6!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!tektronix!teklds!copper!stevesu
From: stevesu@copper.TEK.COM (Steve Summit)
Newsgroups: comp.sources.d
Subject: Re: when using termcap, get it right!
Message-ID: <1161@copper.TEK.COM>
Date: Wed, 24-Jun-87 21:17:29 EDT
Article-I.D.: copper.1161
Posted: Wed Jun 24 21:17:29 1987
Date-Received: Fri, 26-Jun-87 07:21:46 EDT
Organization: Tektronix Inc., Beaverton, Or.
Lines: 20
Keywords: termcap, curses
Summary: it's pretty hard to "get termcap right"

I've been meaning to mention this ever since the termcap
discussion started.  (The original complaint was about software
that did not acknowledge sg.)

The reason that so few programs handle terminal dependencies
correctly is that it is a very hard problem, and termcap is not a
particularly good solution.  Furthermore, it is essentially
undocumented.  termcap(5) gives you a sketchy outline, which
might help if you are trying to write a new termcap entry for a
new terminal, but if you are trying to write a new _p_r_o_g_r_a_m which
is supposed to deal correctly with all 2,574 termcap entries
already in there, forget it.

termcap should really be called vicap (or maybe cursescap).
termcap and vi are married to each other; curses may get it
mostly right, but for any other software package (including
more, which is probably #3), all bets are off.

                                           Steve Summit
                                           stevesu@copper.tek.com