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