From owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Sat Jun 13 05:53:26 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 554C032BA07 for ; Sat, 13 Jun 2020 05:53:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kremels@kreme.com) Received: from mail.covisp.net (mail.covisp.net [65.121.55.42]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 49kRbS39kNz4bZF for ; Sat, 13 Jun 2020 05:53:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kremels@kreme.com) From: "@lbutlr" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: CR LF was: freebsd vs. netbsd Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2020 23:53:21 -0600 References: <171506d5-19aa-359e-c21d-f07257c52ebd@freenetMail.de> <00225a04-237d-9051-9aea-12c192106a20@anatoli.ws> <373EDB20-C750-42E2-A41B-EA61F6E49807@kicp.uchicago.edu> <20200609120136.00005b3c@seibercom.net> <2393a1e0-b073-950a-78be-9f57d8e9934b@anatoli.ws> <20200610063555.00003707@seibercom.net> <82F57D0D-E0EC-49F7-824E-20A296C9F549@kicp.uchicago.edu> <250b853a-b436-0e99-b05c-9abd6b6019ef@panix.com> <20200611070630.2cb42786.freebsd@edvax.de> <20200611075658.1dd841a9.freebsd@edvax.de> <20200611082443.0000187a@seibercom.net> <2e6c6baf-9d87-2a02-00c3-578c6630f97f@kicp.uchicago.edu> <20200611172537.2f7cdc07@archlinux> <20200612081401.f5a5c95b.freebsd@edvax.de> <4fff9eab-fa74-afe9-b046-9b0bcdb072ce@panix.com> To: FreeBSD In-Reply-To: Message-Id: <5FE406BC-7295-4A33-BF3C-B81AD4705E6C@kreme.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.80.23.2.2) X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 49kRbS39kNz4bZF X-Spamd-Bar: / Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of kremels@kreme.com designates 65.121.55.42 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=kremels@kreme.com X-Spamd-Result: default: False [0.58 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-0.45)[-0.449]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; MISSING_MIME_VERSION(2.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+mx]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[kreme.com]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-0.61)[-0.615]; TO_DN_ALL(0.00)[]; NEURAL_SPAM_SHORT(0.04)[0.039]; RCVD_COUNT_ZERO(0.00)[0]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:209, ipnet:65.112.0.0/12, country:US]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW(-0.10)[65.121.55.42:from] X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.33 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2020 05:53:26 -0000 On 12 Jun 2020, at 13:32, Montgomery-Smith, Stephen = wrote: > It always seemed to me to be a waste of bits. Why not have one ASCII > code that did both? Then I found out why. >=20 > One time, I decided to try a LF CR at the end of a line instead of CR > LF. I found that the next character that was typed ended up in the > middle of the page, not on the far left as it should have been. What = I > realized was that the CR takes time to complete, because it has to > physically move the printer head to the left margin. The extra LF = gave > the printer the extra time it needed. Not sure about teletypes, butt here were other reasons to have separate = codes for line feeds and carriage return: strikeout and underline. This word is underlined ,,,,,,,,,,,,,__________=20 Where each , is a space. Same for strikethrough, m using a dash instead. --=20 We understand the importance of having the bondage between the parent and the child.