Timeline for Why did Acorn use LF+CR instead of CR+LF as a line ending?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 30 at 11:05 | history | edited | TonyM | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Typo' fix.
|
| Apr 29 at 22:29 | comment | added | Raffzahn | Great analysis. Like it. | |
| Apr 29 at 22:01 | vote | accept | Simon Kissane | ||
| Apr 29 at 19:50 | comment | added | supercat | Actaully, looking at the code again, I think I misspoke: while swapping all occurrences of CR and LF would yield code that would output CR+LF in response to the Unix-style bare LF, the code could be two bytes shorter if the character which was received in the accumulator were the one that was output first. | |
| Apr 29 at 18:13 | history | edited | TonyM | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Typo' fix.
|
| Apr 29 at 17:25 | comment | added | supercat | An interesting thing to note about this code is that if line breaks were indicating using a bare LF, this approach would output the CR first. I find it interesting in retrospect that the idea that CR should advance the paper seems to have predated the idea that LF should reset the carriage, even though being able to just reset the carriage is probably more often useful than being able to just advance the paper. | |
| Apr 29 at 15:42 | history | edited | TonyM | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Typo' fix.
|
| Apr 29 at 13:00 | history | answered | TonyM | CC BY-SA 4.0 |