Account Options

  1. Sign in
The old Google Groups will be going away soon, but your browser is incompatible with the new version.
Google Groups Home
« Groups Home
PostScript Language Level 1 compatiblity
There are currently too many topics in this group that display first. To make this topic appear first, remove this option from another topic.
There was an error processing your request. Please try again.
flag
  1 message - Collapse all  -  Translate all to Translated (View all originals)
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 
From:
To:
Cc:
Followup To:
Add Cc | Add Followup-to | Edit Subject
Subject:
Validation:
For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers you hear
 
Terry Burton  
View profile  
 More options Apr 4 2011, 5:42 pm
From: Terry Burton <t...@terryburton.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2011 22:42:49 +0100
Local: Mon, Apr 4 2011 5:42 pm
Subject: PostScript Language Level 1 compatiblity
HI,

I received a simple patch recently that adds PostScript Language Level
1 compatibly to BWIPP. This improves compatibility with older or
simpler devices and might make things more efficient in some rare
cases.

So far as our codebase is concerned, the essential differences between
the Level 2 language (where we are now) and Level 1 language level are
as follows:

1. dicts are fixed size

We must properly size these in advance. No bad thing in the majority
of cases although some of our structures are dynamically sized based
on the user input. No big deal.

2. No << ... >> syntax for dicts

We must use alternative notation which makes the code slightly more
opaque in places.

3. No named resource support

We can guard this code so that the PostScript reverts to defining
standard PostScript procedure definitions (possibly in some named
dict, say uk_co_terryburton_bwipp) when the named resource mechanism
is not available.

So on balance what do people think? Worth the effort? Does anybody
have a production use case that would benefit from this?

Thanks,

Terry


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
End of messages
« Back to Discussions « Newer topic     Older topic »