Path: utzoo!yunexus!geac!syntron!jtsv16!uunet!husc6!uwvax!rutgers!ucsd!ames!amdahl!nsc!voder!wlbr!mh
From: mh@wlbr.EATON.COM (Mike Hoegeman)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.news
Subject: Re: Window Warz
Message-ID: <23065@wlbr.EATON.COM>
Date: 7 Sep 88 00:47:20 GMT
Article-I.D.: wlbr.23065
References: <8809021443.AA12775@uunet.UU.NET>
Reply-To: mh@wlbr.eaton.com.UUCP (Mike Hoegeman)
Organization: Eaton IMSD, Westlake Village, CA
Lines: 25

In article <8809021443.AA12775@uunet.UU.NET> mo@prisma.UUCP (Mike O'Dell) writes:
>
.etc....
>the world doesn't accomodate such things.  There is no "right one"
>simply because they all have serious problems.  A few examples,
>not to pick on anyone in particular
>
.etc...
>
>(2) NeWS suffers from needing two programming languages, one worse than
>	most assemblers.  This could change soon, however.
>	It is still complex but flexible.  NeWS needs a toolkit, too.

Classifying PostScript as "worse than most assemblers" is inane at best.
Have you ever programmed in postscript for more than a day?. If you have,
my apologies. I'll take your opinion at face value. If you have'nt then
please don't make such cavalier statements. Where I work one person
was really afraid of the prospect of having to write PostScript code. Once
they got into it though THEY PREFERRED IT TO WRITING C CODE !!!. I myself
write in PostScript and C daily and have no problems switching between the
two. It's really not that big of a deal and the power you get with PostScript
makes it well worth the trouble it takes (which is no worse than C in my
opinion) to learn it. In short don't knock it till you've tried it.

-mike