Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!mailrus!iuvax!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!topaz.rutgers.edu!busboys.rutgers.edu!gaynor From: gaynor@busboys.rutgers.edu (Silver) Newsgroups: comp.lang.postscript Subject: Re: Compiled PostScript Message-ID: Date: 6 Jan 90 00:41:04 GMT References: <1666@intercon.com> <17533@rpp386.cactus.org> <1673@intercon.com> <1683@intercon.com> Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J. Lines: 39 Ag> I stress the benefit that a PostScript compiler would encourage programmers Ag> to program in PostScript itself (i.e., not just as a display medium) Ag> instead of more primitive languages. AW> I mean, interpreted PostScript is plenty quick (in NeWS, for example), but AW> it has it's share of primitive aspects. Primitive aspects? Hee hee, unlike C, right? The speed of the interpreter is relative. Sure, it will fairly fly for `reasonable' requests, but this is not a reasonable world. AW> It's kind of like Forth in this respect I tend to think of PostScript as the offspring of a wild fling between Lisp, Forth, and a bunch of graphics primitives. There is just as much Lisp `in' PostScript as there is Forth. AW> writing code to handle single operations is fine, but I wouldn't want to AW> write a large application in it, even though it could be done. This is kind of contradictory, as single operations can be the combination of other single operations. At some point, a combination of single operations will take on the aspects of (thus become) a large application. There's no question that PostScript has at least the minimum functionality to do so. The question you raise concerns the Ease and Convenience of developing such applications in PostScript. Now, it's fair to say that NeWS is an elegant upgrade from page description to the graphical application/interface realm. Examining historical precedent, GNU Emacs is an elegant upgrade from a text editor to the terminal application/interface realm. There are many parallels between the two, although I would hesitate say that NeWS is to PostScript what GNU Emacs is to Lisp. They are certainly similar enough at the lower levels, and the underlying languages are very high level and similar in expressive power (once one becomes accustomed to the world of postfix notation). Given these relationships, its not inconceivable that they might follow the same path. It would make things immensely easier if there was a development platform for PostScript under NeWS as good as the one for Lisp under Emacs. Just pipe-dreaming, [Ag] gaynor@topaz.rutgers.edu