Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!image.soe.clarkson.edu!news From: nelson@sun.soe.clarkson.edu (Russ Nelson) Newsgroups: comp.lang.postscript Subject: Re: Bad PostScript Message-ID: Date: 28 Nov 89 04:25:27 GMT References: <128431@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> Sender: news@sun.soe.clarkson.edu Reply-To: nelson@clutx.clarkson.edu Distribution: na Organization: Clarkson University, Potsdam NY Lines: 22 In-reply-to: henry%angel@Sun.COM's message of 27 Nov 89 22:15:32 GMT In article <128431@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> henry%angel@Sun.COM (Henry McGilton -- Software Products) writes: Using the { < . . . > } sequence to get sampled image data onto the stack as the procedure argument to the image operator. This only works up to a certain point, and then breaks, resulting in plenty of debugging time on the part of the consumer, not the developer. Use the readhexstring operator and do it right next time, please. Yes, if you're going to use {< . . . >}, you may as well use readhexstring. However, if you need multiple copies of the image, you pretty much *have* to use /image < . . . > def and then {image}. Otherwise you have to put multiple copies of the image in the input stream. At 9600 baud, I'd rather not. -- --russ (nelson@clutx [.bitnet | .clarkson.edu]) Live up to the light thou hast, and more will be granted thee. A recession now appears more than 2 years away -- John D. Mathon, 4 Oct 1989. I think killing is value-neutral in and of itself. -- Gary Strand, 8 Nov 1989. Liberals run this country, by and large. -- Clayton Cramer, 20 Nov 1989. Shut up and mind your Canadian business, you meddlesome foreigner. -- TK, 23 N.