Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!bbn!apple!voder!wlbr!mh
From: mh@wlbr.EATON.COM (Mike Hoegeman)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.postscript
Subject: Re: Wanted: a PostScript pretty-printer
Keywords: postscript
Message-ID: <26038@wlbr.EATON.COM>
Date: 28 Jan 89 21:18:06 GMT
References: <477@grand.UUCP>
Reply-To: mh@wlbr.eaton.com.UUCP (Mike Hoegeman)
Organization: Eaton IMSD, Westlake Village, CA
Lines: 57

In article <477@grand.UUCP> day@grand.UUCP (Dave Yost) writes:
>Anyone know of a PostScript pretty-printer?
>
>Anyone want to start a discussion of PS indenting style? (heh, heh)
>
> --dave yost

......well, maybe a little , i prefer
indentation similar to the original K&R book C indentation style.

/procname {
% i ususally just use the same indent level for the scope dict of a procedure
% as the procedure itself, otherwise the indent level just gets too deep..
% within the procedure body.
10 dict begin 
    bool_val {
	% stuff here
    } {
	% more stuff here
    } ifelse

    % if i have a big array defn i usually do it like this..
    /my_array [
	1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0
	1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0
    ] def

    % if it smaller it's just 
    /small_array [ 1 2 3 4 5] def
end
} def

% even if the procedure is pretty small i'll still indent it like a big one

/dummy_proc {
    0 pop
} def

% one thing i don't particularly like is putting comments on the same line
% as code like...

/lame { %  a lot of people put a short proc description here, i hate this
    %% proc body here....
} def

it's to hard to scan thru comments if you are trying figure out the general
workings of a procedure

anyway in response to your query, Josh Seigel  (siegel@hc.dspo.gov) has
made a good postscript pretty printer. it's on the SEX
(software exchange) tape from the miami sun user's group conference
held last december. i would'nt be surprised if it was on titan.rice.edu
in the sun-spots archive either.

if you have trouble finding it I'll post it.

mike.