| ▲ | floren 2 hours ago | |||||||
As I understand it (this may be apocryphal but I've seen it in multiple places) the print head on simple-minded output devices didn't move fast enough to get all the way back over to the left before it started to output the next character. Making LF a separate character to be issued after CR meant that the line feed would happen while the carriage was returning, and then it's ready to print the next character. This lets you process incoming characters at a consistent rate; otherwise you'd need some way to buffer the characters that arrived while the CR was happening. Now, if you want to use CR by itself for fancy overstriking etc. you'd need to put something else into the character stream, like a space followed by a backspace, just to kill time. | ||||||||
| ▲ | kstrauser an hour ago | parent [-] | |||||||
I don't think that's right. Not saying that to argue, more to discuss this because it's fun to think about. In any event, wouldn't you have to either buffer or use flow-control to pause receiving while a CR was being processed? You wouldn't want to start printing the next line's characters in reverse while the carriage was going back to the beginning. My suspicion is there was a committee that was more bent on purity than practicality that day, and they were opposed to the idea of having CR for "go to column 0" and newline for "go to column 0 and also advance the paper", even though it seems extremely unlikely you'd ever want "advance the paper without going to column 0" (which you could still emulate it with newline + tab or newline + 43 spaces for those exceptional cases). | ||||||||
| ||||||||