On 2011-03-12, Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> wrote:
> Sorry if I wasn't clear: I was intending to compare APIs rather than the > display mechanisms - I am aware that both text terminals and vector > graphics terminals are raster devices, not vector like oscilloscopes. > What I was getting at is that the API used to cause graphics or text to > be output on a dot-matrix printer is totally unlike that used to draw to > same representations on a pen plotter. You're right. The point I was trying to make was that the 240 was a superset of the 220, and could be used identically as the 220 was used. Back in the years when I used a 240 for 8 hours day the the exact same API was used for the 240 as was used for a 220. The only exception was the afternoon I decided to write a clock app just to see how the graphics mode on a 240 worked. I have no idea why my employer bought 240's instead of 220's. It's not like anybody spent a lot of time looking at drawings of wombats -- in fact, I was probably the only person at the company who knew you could. [Talk about obscure VMS allusions...] -- Grant -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list