Re: Sierpinski

From	Ilya Zakharevich <nospam-abuse@ilyaz.org>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.postscript
Subject	Re: Sierpinski
Date	2011-12-25 22:49 +0000
Organization	U.C. Berkeley Math. Department.
Message-ID	<slrnjffa4i.ndd.nospam-abuse@panda.math.berkeley.edu> (permalink)
References	<111db8ba-d74d-4641-9be8-b8396eb7b74a@f11g2000yql.googlegroups.com> <b9b6fdd9-ffa2-4a63-adbf-bb065c1e4f58@p13g2000yqd.googlegroups.com> <slrnjfcvak.km1.nospam-abuse@panda.math.berkeley.edu> <4794ae67-2feb-4de1-8326-877301c0adc5@o9g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>

Show all headers | View raw

On 2011-12-25, luser- -droog <mijoryx@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Dec 24, 7:33 pm, Ilya Zakharevich <nospam-ab...@ilyaz.org> wrote:
>> Just a hint: I do my Sierpinski in 0.5 setgray.  Then the stipple
>> pattern of a Laser printer makes the impression of "infinite depth".
>> Here is the source of one of the problems for the baby math circle:

To be fair, the real Sierpinski contains exactly 0 grams of ink. So a
fair representation would use  1 setgray  ;-).  I must say that the
results with positive amount of ink look much better.  ;-) ;-) ;-)

> I'm uncontrollably forced to wonder whether countexecstack
> would be at all useful here (since its only apparent use is in
> the error-handler). You'd still have to do comparisons, but
> you might be able to factor out the increment (and less on the
> stack.

Honestly, I do not get heads or tails of what you want to say here.  I
see that neither my code nor your uses `countexecstack', and can't see
how it would help (at least in my code - the recursion is very shallow
there).

Yours,
Ilya

Back to comp.lang.postscript | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Koch snowflake using Lindenmeyer System luser- -droog <mijoryx@yahoo.com> - 2011-12-23 14:32 -0800
  Re: Koch snowflake using Lindenmeyer System luser- -droog <mijoryx@yahoo.com> - 2011-12-24 03:59 -0800
    Re: Sierpinski Ilya Zakharevich <nospam-abuse@ilyaz.org> - 2011-12-25 01:33 +0000
      Re: Sierpinski luser- -droog <mijoryx@yahoo.com> - 2011-12-24 21:22 -0800
        Re: Sierpinski Ilya Zakharevich <nospam-abuse@ilyaz.org> - 2011-12-25 22:49 +0000
          Re: Sierpinski luser- -droog <mijoryx@yahoo.com> - 2011-12-25 19:19 -0800
            Re: Sierpinski Ilya Zakharevich <nospam-abuse@ilyaz.org> - 2011-12-27 20:09 +0000
      Re: Sierpinski tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> - 2011-12-26 21:47 -0500
        Re: Sierpinski Ilya Zakharevich <nospam-abuse@ilyaz.org> - 2011-12-27 20:13 +0000
          Re: Sierpinski tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> - 2011-12-27 16:37 -0500
      Re: Sierpinski tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> - 2011-12-26 22:26 -0500
      Re: Sierpinski tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> - 2011-12-26 23:24 -0500
        Re: Sierpinski Ilya Zakharevich <nospam-abuse@ilyaz.org> - 2011-12-27 20:22 +0000
          Re: Sierpinski tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> - 2011-12-27 16:29 -0500
            Re: [OT] Sierpinski etc Ilya Zakharevich <nospam-abuse@ilyaz.org> - 2011-12-28 22:37 +0000
              Re: [OT] Sierpinski etc tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> - 2011-12-28 19:53 -0500
                Re: Sierpinski etc luser- -droog <mijoryx@yahoo.com> - 2011-12-28 23:35 -0800
                Re: Sierpinski etc tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> - 2011-12-29 12:07 -0500
    ??? using Lindenmeyer System luser- -droog <mijoryx@yahoo.com> - 2011-12-27 22:55 -0800
      Re: ???(broccoli) using Lindenmeyer System luser- -droog <mijoryx@yahoo.com> - 2011-12-31 15:32 -0800

csiph-web