From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_DATE, MSGID_SHORT,REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!ucsd!helios.ee.lbl.gov!nosc!cod!sampson From: sampson@cod.NOSC.MIL (Charles H. Sampson) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Terminal Column Number Message-ID: <2022@cod.NOSC.MIL> Date: 30 Jul 90 16:14:39 GMT Reply-To: sampson@cod.nosc.mil.UUCP (Charles H. Sampson) Organization: Computer Sciences Corporation X-Local-Date: 30 Jul 90 09:14:39 PDT List-Id: Another article, titled TEXT_IO Anomaly, pointed out that the column number for STANDARD_OUTPUT is unaffected by STANDARD_INPUT. In particular, the carriage return that terminates an input line does not set the column number for STANDARD_OUTPUT to 1, even though the cursor is now blinking at the left margin. From the ensuing discussion it seems clear to me that this behaviour is a correct interpretation of the LRM. My question is, "Is it useful?" Does anyone know of a meaningful piece of code that makes use of the column num- ber for STANDARD_OUTPUT as it is currently implemented by (apparently) all compiler writers? (I don't know how other readers feel, but the less toy- like an example is the more I find it convincing.) Charlie Sampson