System-2-L

[Daniel L. Weinreb <dlw at MIT-AI>]

Yeah, I think it is worse than Terminal-3-S, although they're close.
I'd say that Terminal-3-S is just barely OK and System-2-L is just
barely not OK.

Oh, I see now why you asked for it; I hadn't understood from the first
message.  Well, yes.  This is what we call an "advanced user" feature,
since one would have had to be pretty damned familiar with the window
system to have anticipated all of these effects and then realized that
the little-used System-2-L command (had it existed) would be the right
thing in this case.  Since it is easy to document ("it's like System L
twice"), I wouldn't mind seeing it put in, although I can't belive it is
going to get a whole lot of use...