Phil Sainty <psainty@orcon.net.nz> schrieb am Mi., 23. Nov. 2016 um
21:09 Uhr:

> On 24/11/16 08:44, Philipp Stephani wrote:
> > Phil Sainty <psainty@orcon.net.nz> schrieb am Mo., 31. Okt. 2016 um
> >> This is a duplicate of bug #21609 -- any command which directly
> >> modifies the state of the terminal buffer can cause the apparent
> >> state to be out of sync with the 'actual' state (i.e. the state
> >> according to the inferior process).
> >
> > Should maybe terminal buffers in char-mode be read-only? The process
> > filter could then use inhibit-read-only.
>
> That's an interesting thought, and may be worth investigating (offhand
> I've no idea whether it's workable), but note that it's not sufficient
> to deal with all cases -- any Emacs command which moves point can create
> an inconsistent state without modifying the buffer contents.
>
>
Hmm, then maybe the entire buffer also needs to be made intangible, except
for the actual position of the terminal cursor?