wombat@ccvaxa.UUCP (04/24/86)
It looks like ^\ and ^^ (= ^~) are becoming the standard replacements for ^s/^q. Unfortunately, ^^ is the magic cookie for the terminal concentrator I'm connected to. Is a secondary standard emreging? (Are there any control characters left?) "When you are about to die, a wombat is better than no company at all." Roger Zelazny, *Doorways in the Sand* Wombat ihnp4!uiucdcs!ccvaxa!wombat
figmo@atari.UUcp (Lynn Gold) (04/26/86)
In article <11600012@ccvaxa>, wombat@ccvaxa.UUCP writes: > > It looks like ^\ and ^^ (= ^~) are becoming the standard replacements for > ^s/^q. Unfortunately, ^^ is the magic cookie for the terminal concentrator > I'm connected to. Is a secondary standard emreging? (Are there any control > characters left?) > I've used ^XS and ^XQ even though they are defined as other things. One idea might be to allow ^\ to be another prefix. Another is to use ^CS and ^CQ; both are currently undefined, and both are similar to the commands you are trying to make up for. --Lynn -- Atari Corp. 1196 Borregas Ave. UUCP: vecpyr!atari!figmo Sunnyvale, CA ARPA: Lynn%PANDA@SUMEX-AIM (408) 745-2930 +---------------------------------------------------------------------+ | The opinions represented in this posting are mine. Any resemblance | | between these and my employer's opinions is purely coincidental. | +---------------------------------------------------------------------+
ron@brl-sem.ARPA (Ron Natalie <ron>) (04/29/86)
> I've used ^XS and ^XQ even though they are defined as other things. > One idea might be to allow ^\ to be another prefix. Another is to use > ^CS and ^CQ; both are currently undefined, and both are similar to the > commands you are trying to make up for. The problem here is that there are ^X^S bindings, also, by just globally saying that whereever you would have used ^S use ^\ solves this problem as well. -Ron