Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.postscript > #2947
| From | ken <ken@spamcop.net> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.postscript |
| Subject | Re: Calls to eval() in the inner interpreter loop |
| Date | 2016-11-21 17:36 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.329d40ecb62fc77c989911@usenet.plus.net> (permalink) |
| References | (2 earlier) <56658992-f00c-4d28-ae9b-bfab9e8cba4e@googlegroups.com> <cc234c79-3daa-494b-babb-cef8a728b7f5@googlegroups.com> <7f87cf24-3d74-45c6-8854-f7e4abd33d4f@googlegroups.com> <MPG.329cb8ace53c3645989910@usenet.plus.net> <49436ab7-8794-4810-bd9c-77ed2ab8cdb6@googlegroups.com> |
In article <49436ab7-8794-4810-bd9c-77ed2ab8cdb6@googlegroups.com>, luser.droog@gmail.com says... > I think I must have misunderstood something long ago. > I /think/ I got the notion from this part, but reading > carefully, I does not appear to say what I thought it > said: Well, its all true, but... it doesn't (or isn't intended) to mean that we intend to rewrite any C code into PostScript! In fact the reverse is more generally true these days. Where it makes sense to deal in PostScript (as the docs say, when dealing primarily with PostScript data structures or operations that **only** affect the PostScript interpreter) we tend to write code in PostScript. Where we are not interacting with the PostScript interpreter we tend to write in C. In general we are more likely to move PostScript code into C than the reverse. Ken
Back to comp.lang.postscript | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Calls to eval() in the inner interpreter loop luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2016-11-19 19:37 -0800
Re: Calls to eval() in the inner interpreter loop luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2016-11-19 21:33 -0800
Re: Calls to eval() in the inner interpreter loop luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2016-11-19 21:49 -0800
Re: Calls to eval() in the inner interpreter loop vincent.torri@gmail.com - 2016-11-20 19:46 -0800
Re: Calls to eval() in the inner interpreter loop luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2016-11-20 20:30 -0800
Re: Calls to eval() in the inner interpreter loop ken <ken@spamcop.net> - 2016-11-21 07:54 +0000
Re: Calls to eval() in the inner interpreter loop luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2016-11-21 08:16 -0800
Re: Calls to eval() in the inner interpreter loop ken <ken@spamcop.net> - 2016-11-21 17:36 +0000
Re: Calls to eval() in the inner interpreter loop luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2016-11-22 20:59 -0800
csiph-web