From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Juanma Barranquero" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: isearch multiple buffers Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2007 13:19:02 +0200 Message-ID: References: <87odfcggvl.fsf@jurta.org> <87odepv21n.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <87ir4wjcev.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <47203C01.4070909@gmx.at> <86ejfj4fjs.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1193311163 21174 80.91.229.12 (25 Oct 2007 11:19:23 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2007 11:19:23 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "David Kastrup" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Oct 25 13:19:21 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Il0kC-0008VR-MC for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 25 Oct 2007 13:19:20 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Il0k4-0000Wn-7G for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 25 Oct 2007 07:19:12 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Il0k0-0000Uj-QU for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 25 Oct 2007 07:19:08 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Il0jx-0000Po-Sm for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 25 Oct 2007 07:19:08 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Il0jx-0000PX-Ki for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 25 Oct 2007 07:19:05 -0400 Original-Received: from nz-out-0506.google.com ([64.233.162.236]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Il0jx-0002pr-A4 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 25 Oct 2007 07:19:05 -0400 Original-Received: by nz-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id f1so466328nzc for ; Thu, 25 Oct 2007 04:19:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=DFEXJ17lTToxBWO8wB6od2CG+LtDPti82clEltw+USY=; b=LK00PtDre/pi1zFzL1B6f1XMegi+FtzARQfh8cSy9/a2rZqgFQrktUh2atvOIBpFA9SF3i0XcDYamse0mmackxU5yhOgHFH3bxLQUiCqepc/GAurRzccrUovVXT2V4DcHKGuEln2//Z4b8yp69CoCslcC7Y/8cJuMHBqUi0RGys= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=Y5X13/QtnAy+qRJzJgtjOcht5GLTCUNBCCB4MAUPZ00nUrHdRV1OeLwDB/alEsSxJ0BcpJ7VcwNA0n6/YE2elJCQp6sa1pbyS+ly2BQyyneT774/tzbkQ4yUW4ZWz81oCDZ/OuZkHsyipGiJ7RnUxAF7MPGu/2EKlAzm9kXUMaE= Original-Received: by 10.114.169.2 with SMTP id r2mr1966558wae.1193311144077; Thu, 25 Oct 2007 04:19:04 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.115.72.13 with HTTP; Thu, 25 Oct 2007 04:19:02 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <86ejfj4fjs.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> Content-Disposition: inline X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:81707 Archived-At: On 10/25/07, David Kastrup wrote: > Gary Kildall (?), CP/M. There were similar schemes in some mainframes and minis. I vaguely remember something like that in RSX-11, on a PDP-11. > Boxes with 64kB of address space and > typically about 100kB of disk space. Not *that* different of the initial IBM PCs. > Adopting it wasn't. I disagree. > CP/M compatibility induced issues continue to > haunt Windows after all these years. True. Microsoft should've switched aggresively to the NT codebase after Windows 3.11; there's no reasonable excuse for W95/98/Me :) Juanma