From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: mah@mhorton.net (Mary Ann Horton) Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2015 08:02:54 -0800 Subject: [TUHS] termcap vs terminfo In-Reply-To: <201501061222.t06CMvTO027313@freefriends.org> References: <3578.1420226008@cesium.clock.org> <20150105070613.GB10940@server.rulingia.com> <20150106004054.GD16715@mercury.ccil.org> <201501061222.t06CMvTO027313@freefriends.org> Message-ID: <54AC072E.7030605@mhorton.net> On 01/06/2015 04:22 AM, arnold at skeeve.com wrote: >> Peter Jeremy scripsit: >>> But you pay for the size of $TERMCAP in every process you run. > John Cowan wrote: >> A single termcap line doesn't cost that much, less than a KB in most cases. > In 1981 terms, this has more weight. On a non-split I/D PDP-11 you only > have 32KB to start with. (The discussion a few weeks ago about cutting > yacc down to size comes to mind...) > > On a Vax with 2 Meg of memory, 512 bytes is a whole page, and it might > even be paged out, and BSD on the vax didn't have copy-on-write. > > ISTR that the /etc/termcap file had a comment saying something like > "you should move the entries needed at your site to the top of this file." > Or am I imagining it? :-) > > In short - today, sure, no problem - back then, carrying around a large > environment made more of a difference. > > Thanks, > > Arnold > _______________________________________________ > TUHS mailing list > TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org > https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs Even with TERMCAP in the environment, there's still that quadratic algorithm every time vi starts up.