Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!mcsun!ukc!cam-cl!news
From: cet1@cl.cam.ac.uk (C.E. Thompson)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.postscript
Subject: Re: load operator
Message-ID: <1991Mar1.145940.24978@cl.cam.ac.uk>
Date: 1 Mar 91 14:59:40 GMT
References: <1991Feb26.010153.5370@kfw.COM> <436@heaven.woodside.ca.us> <1991Feb28.151933.8786@cl.cam.ac.uk> <12334@goofy.Apple.COM>
Reply-To: cet1@cl.cam.ac.uk (C.E. Thompson)
Organization: U of Cambridge Comp Lab, UK
Lines: 19

In article <1991Feb28.151933.8786@cl.cam.ac.uk> I wrote:
> {Original articles omitted}
>Every word you say is true, Glenn, but I think you may be misleading the
>original poster. Keys in PostScript directories can have any type (although
>the case of names is usually optimised), but the type is significant when
>matching the key. Thus the user's two examples may both be valid, but
>they won't access the same directory entries. If, as one rather suspects,
>he has added FontDirectory to the directory stack and is hoping to find
>the canonical Times-Roman font, only the second will have the desired effect.
>
After seeing Kevin Andresen's posting, I realise I was quite wrong here!
In the specific case of strings, they are coerced to names during directory
lookup. Thus the two original PostScript fragments will have identical effect.
Mea culpa, and that may teach me to try the experiment before posting next
time. 

Chris Thompson
JANET:    cet1@uk.ac.cam.phx
Internet: cet1%phx.cam.ac.uk@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk