Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Carlos Newsgroups: comp.lang.postscript Subject: Re: Getting Rid Of PostScript Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2016 19:23:39 +0200 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 23 Message-ID: <20161019192339.28665fad@samara.DOMA> References: <52007eb3-d23e-4938-bb11-08ff341ed5a9@googlegroups.com> <76c2a057-6627-4de9-88fc-ca3e1c37c256@googlegroups.com> <1a6d41b2-6c18-4458-a18d-becdc92715a8@googlegroups.com> <040899ac-5cf7-40f5-9aa8-b1db05a900b6@googlegroups.com> <94a0f333-dcc9-4a76-8da9-57595c1433a7@googlegroups.com> <0e89f7c1-08ef-4a1d-9fc8-8d92fd687e03@googlegroups.com> <4bf74c64-049f-436d-b19d-0a5b2e41883b@googlegroups.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: mx02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="55b875c04893e70bbf73c583bd588195"; logging-data="28577"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+l5B8YEvsm/o35LjbwfYp8QYyg2R+H96Q=" X-Newsreader: Claws Mail 3.13.2 (GTK+ 2.24.30; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Cancel-Lock: sha1:6p6WuG7MWWgp8v7GaQ9FUkXrLfc= Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.postscript:2908 [Ross Presser , 2016-10-18 23:05] > On Tuesday, October 18, 2016 at 6:35:39 PM UTC-4, Lawrence > D=E2=80=99Oliveiro wrote: > > Basically, the only implementation of PostScript still worth using > > is Ghostscript. Is PostScript itself still worth using? Only for > > backward compatibility; not for anything new. =20 >=20 > I continue to be confused as to why you are proseletyzing against > Postscript in a group named comp.lang.postscript. The group isn't > named comp.lang.kill-all-postscript-lovers. Can you take it > elsewhere, or are you congentially incapable of leaving people to > their own enthusiasms? I disagree. I think criticism of PostScript and negative opinions should be welcome, especially when they are founded. In my case, they don't diminish my enthusiasm about the language at all. But in any case, by request, he's mainly restricting criticism to this thread, so if you don't like to read it, why don't you just ignore the thread? Any newsreader should have that capability. --=20