Memory was less expensive when the 3278 and 3279 came out, and optionally inserting character attributes would not have been a major redesign.
-- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 ________________________________________ From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [[email protected]] on behalf of Paul Gilmartin [[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2022 2:32 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: AUXLIST (was XEDIT equivalent to ISPF C - OO/OO (copy overlay)) On Thu, 24 Feb 2022 18:47:14 +0000, Seymour J Metz wrote: >It was a fundamental design flaw on the 3277; IBM could have easilly fixed it >with the introduction of EDS. Why isn't there a protected character attribute? > Storage was expensive. The designers budgeted for 1920 bytes. Subsequently, compatibility. Il cimento dell'armonia e dell'inventione. But it's overdue for the ISPF and XEDIT designers to do what ISPF promised never to do: introduce support for curses/terminfo-based terminals. Most desktops have those nowadays. How does KEDIT treat column 72? >________________________________________ >From: Phil Smith III >Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2022 1:39 PM > >Well, it's not a separate field: this is 3270, so there would be an >attribute byte on the screen between column 71 and 72 if it were R/O (a >fundamental design flaw in the 3270 protocol IMHO, but 45+ years too late to >fix). TRUNC lets you SEE stuff without being able to change it, which can be >A Good Thing. -- gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
