Subject: Re: com rumblings...
To: Garrett D'Amore <email@example.com>
From: Bill Studenmund <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 06/19/2006 18:29:01
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Thu, Jun 15, 2006 at 01:21:30PM -0700, Garrett D'Amore wrote:
> Charles M. Hannum wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 15, 2006 at 12:54:53PM -0700, Garrett D'Amore wrote:
> > =20
> > As for zs vs. com, notice that their guts are almost identical. Maybe
> > this is because I retooled both of them at the same time...
> Maybe. I should look at it in more detail. It looks like there are
> enough differences that making zs.c just another instantiation of com(4)
> might be a bad idea. (The separate mouse/keyboard streams at least
> comes to mind.)
That'd be a bad idea. The 8530 has enough stuff going on that trying to=20
shove it into a different family's concept of how registers work & such=20
would just be nasty.
Charles got the core of the logic right in the two of them, that's good=20
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (NetBSD)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----