The splitting you talk about came about because of the Blit, one part

of a program running on the host, the 'graphical' part on the terminal,

i.e., the Blit; the two parts communicated with a simple protocol, an

example of which you can see in 'sam'. 'Cip', 'proof', 'jim', 'sam' and

'pi' (really, 'pads'), followed this model. It wasn't necessary I think

with all programs, and I'm sure 'icon', the bitmap editor, didn't.

If you look in the various Blit/Jerq source directories in the distributions

you will see programs with a 'host' and 'term' subdirectory.

On Mon, Jan 31, 2022 at 6:18 PM <arnold@skeeve.com> wrote:

Thanks for the link. I skimmed it and will read it later.

What struck me was the splitting of the editor into front and back ends
that did not have to be on the same machine. Rob Pike used that design
for "sam" somewhat later. I wonder if he got the idea from 's' or came
up with it on his own... (Dough, thoughts?)

Thanks,

Arnold

Will Senn <will.senn@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Arnold,
>
> It was mentioned in the STinP edit discussion, so of course, I had to go looking! Here's the referenced article by Fraser:
>
> https://archive.org/details/compact-portable-crt
>
> Will
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Jan 30, 2022, at 10:09 AM, arnold@skeeve.com wrote:
> >
> > Will Senn <will.senn@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Has anyone seen Fraser's original ratfor source for the s editor for unix on the PDP-11. It was a screen editor front-end built on top of Software Tools's edit. I've seen a c version, but I'm interested in the 375 line version :).
> >>
> >> Will
> >>
> >> Sent from my iPhone
> >
> > I've never heard of this. Can you give some background please?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Arnold