Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!seismo!sundc!pitstop!sun!decwrl!labrea!agate!pasteur!ucbvax!dot.unipress.COM!rehmi
From: rehmi@dot.unipress.COM (Rehmi Post)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.news
Subject: Re:  Postscript
Message-ID: <8809140041.AA10313@dot.>
Date: 14 Sep 88 04:10:55 GMT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 23

>From: rutgers!uunet.uu.net!prisma!mo (Mike O'Dell)

>>(2) NeWS suffers from needing two programming languages, one worse than
>>	most assemblers.  This could change soon, however.

>One reader took great umbrage at my somewhat whimsical description
>of Postscript as "being worse than most assemblers." ...

Oh! I thought you were referring to C -- I couldn't have agreed more. Was
it Dick Gabriel who mentioned that C had set software engineering in the US
back by almost a decade?

Now that you mention it, PostScript is a neat little object-oriented assembly
language. Granted, the confusion between errors and stop/stopped and exit/loop
could stand smoothing out, but where else (besides lisp) is it so easy to build
new control constructs?

In a slightly more serious vein, does anyone know of efforts underway
to develop a generalized PostScript engine in silicon? Or is everyone
concentrating on making either YARISC or Smalltalk chips? With ASSQ
hardware, PostScript would really churn.

rehmi