Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!ames!ll-xn!mit-eddie!fenchurch.mit.edu!jbs
From: jbs@fenchurch.MIT.EDU (Jeff Siegal)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: Input Line Editing
Message-ID: <9674@eddie.MIT.EDU>
Date: 14 Jul 88 03:23:03 GMT
References: <16456@brl-adm.ARPA> <9666@eddie.MIT.EDU> <10443@ulysses.homer.nj.att.com> <9671@eddie.MIT.EDU> <23839@bu-cs.BU.EDU>
Sender: uucp@eddie.MIT.EDU
Reply-To: jbs@eddie.MIT.EDU (Jeff Siegal)
Organization: MIT EE/CS Computer Facilities, Cambridge, MA
Lines: 15

In article <23839@bu-cs.BU.EDU> bzs@bu-cs.BU.EDU (Barry Shein) writes:
>[...]if it's done as an intermediate process how
>does the process know when to step out of the way because a newly
>started job is doing its own style of input editing?

As Doug said, kernel support should be provided as necessary.  In this
case, provide a way for the intermediate process to determine (or be
told) that the terminal (perhaps a pseudo-terminal) has been switched
out of cooked mode.  As has already been pointed out, Emacs shell
buffers could use such a service to improve support for input editing.

Perhaps I missed this, but shouldn't the question be "How to provide
*better* input editing in Unix?"  The kernel already provides limited
editing capability in cooked mode, yes?

Jeff Siegal