[Info-vax] CLI editing, was: Re: VMS - Virtual Terminals - A security risk way back yonder OR was that an Old Wives Tale ?

[Johnny Billquist]

On 2016-02-12 21:56, Stephen Hoffman wrote:
> On 2016-02-12 19:53:13 +0000, Simon Clubley said:
>
>> On 2016-02-12, Hein RMS van den Heuvel <heinvandenheuvel at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> The other thing Windows is also infinitely better than OpenVMS is for
>>> command line recall and editing. As much as I love OpenVMS and DCL,
>>> the command line editing is a lame joke in DCL.
>>
>> If you think Windows CLI editing is better than VMS (and it is), then
>> try bash on Linux. It leaves Windows standing in the dust.
>
> Linux, BSD, Unix, illumos, OS X, etc, all have far better support for
> the command line than does OpenVMS.

To be fair, Linux, BSD, UNix, illumos, OS X, etc, would seem to all 
actually be Unix, and what you are referring to is bash, which have a 
better support for the command line than does OpenVMS.

Unix (by any of these names) do in fact not have better support, but 
worse. The system functionality for reading and editing from a terminal 
is way more primitivt that what VMS have.

It is bash (and a library called readline), which offers they very nice 
experience.

Curious about bash, does not bash retain this functionality in the VMS port?

>>> Shameful, hurtful, NIH syndrome. "we know what's good for you".. no
>>> you don't.
>>
>> I have expressed my opinions _many_ times on this in comp.os.vms and
>> even submitted formal enhancement requests in the past (with no
>> response to the latter).
>
> Ayup.   No one wants to get near the terminal driver for any significant
> work, absent sufficient schedule and staff for something between an
> overhaul and wholesale replacement.   And that will break some existing
> applications   There's decades of accreted and legacy cruft lurking
> under that particular cairn of code, but — as soon as you start turning
> over any rocks to see what's underneath and to rework and replace the
> worst of it — the COMPATIBILITY! COMPATIBILITY! COMPATIBILITY! crowd
> arrives.    As with more than a few other places in OpenVMS, not
> breaking stuff effectively precludes fixing and enhancing and replacing
> code.   But y'all have heard this rant before, of course.

In a way I find this morbidly interesting. The terminal driver in RSX is 
probably the largest and most insane can of worms there is. I would have 
hoped that it was cleaned in up VMS, and made more sane. But by your 
description, it sounds almost identical to the RSX code...

	Johnny

-- 
Johnny Billquist                  || "I'm on a bus
                                   ||  on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt at softjar.se             ||  Reading murder books
pdp is alive!                     ||  tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol