First of all, thanks for the quick response.
What a farrago of nonsense Go read what I wrote again. Actually, better yet, dont. I dont have time to waste explaining elementary things to you.
A DECRC cannot be safely used unless the same program previously issued a DECSC. No matter whether it stacks or not. Or you angry or not. Or you lock the thread as spam or not.
So what does it solve? Apart from that it’s non-standard and breaks programs.
Not that hard to reason about, so here is one more little example, hope it helps understand (with your stacking behavior):
That seems very wrong to me. It would mean that if application A did a DECSC followed by a DECRC and quit. Then the meaning of DECRC for all subsequent applications is now changed, as it will restore cursor state to whatever application A saved it as.
“application A”: DECSC then crashes (no matching DECRC).
“all subsequent applications is now changed”: they expect DECRC will take them to (0, 0), but it will not be true at the first case. So we can conclude that it’s just as bad as the non-stacking variant. Got it? :)
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.