Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid>
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: Architectural implications of people who =?UTF-8?B?ZG9u4oCZdA==?=
 understand locate mode I/O
Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2024 01:35:02 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 10
Message-ID: <v629s6$1sclf$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v61jeh$k6d$1@gal.iecc.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 03 Jul 2024 03:35:02 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="cf883433ea21f3408a2b17a5cac6794f";
	logging-data="1979055"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19QNoPmXoH81MKEhdP8cL1N"
User-Agent: Pan/0.158 (Avdiivka; )
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Lih12VSwcpQbALSy6ORgbobAORI=
Bytes: 1427

On Tue, 2 Jul 2024 19:12:17 -0000 (UTC), John Levine wrote:

> After our recent silly arguments about locate vs move mode I/O, I got to
> thinking about what a computer needs for locate mode even to be
> interesting.

Should there be some kind of flashing indicator saying “LOCATE MODE I/O IN 
EFFECT”, or should it be the opposite “LOCATE MODE I/O NOT IN EFFECT”? 
Maybe the latter, to remind those who think they’ve engaged it, that they 
haven’t.