Re: Implementing image support for kitty terminal

[Gerd Möllmann]

Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> writes:

> Note that the comment dates back to:
>
>     commit 4588ec205730239596486e8ad4d18d541917199a
>     Author: Jim Blandy <jimb@redhat.com>
>     Date:   Wed Jul 3 12:10:07 1991 +0000
>     
>         Initial revision
>
> so there's a chance it's ... slightly dated?

Yup, the telnet part at least looks to me like a coprolith :-).

For the rest, it's hard to tell.  That's another heuristic where it's
impossible to tell (for me) if it's (still) needed or not.

Maybe we could remove it, and wait for complaints?  I wouldm't mind.

BTW, do you have a slow connection you could use to test larger stream
buffer sizes with, at least anecdotally?  If we remove the flushes,
except at the end of the update, and give the output stream a large
buffer (setvbuf, or something), we could at least get some impression if
that may benefit users.

I don't have any SSH access to other computers, alas.