Re: PostScript Ideas Worth Resurrecting

From	Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.postscript
Subject	Re: PostScript Ideas Worth Resurrecting
Date	2024-03-26 06:19 +0000
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID	<uttpe5$1l948$3@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References	<us12kp$2bna6$1@dont-email.me> <3f1e7e13-10d3-4952-bc00-d10a5a1d4e40@davidnewall.com>

Show all headers | View raw

On Tue, 26 Mar 2024 16:11:07 +1100, David Newall wrote:

> On 3/3/24 16:42, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>
>> But these “function” objects do have some deficiencies: no (simple)
>> support for reentrant local variables, and no lexical binding. Fix
>> these up, and you have a much more useful language.
> 
> % p1 p2 p3 f -  % demonstrate local variables and recursive parameters
> /f {
>   6 dict begin
>    /p3 exch def
>    /p2 exch def
>    /p1 exch def
>    /l1 (value) def
>    /l2 (value) def
>    /l3 (value) def ...
>   end
> } def
> 
> No?

Notice I said “reentrant”?

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

Thread

PostScript Ideas Worth Resurrecting Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-03-03 05:42 +0000
  Re: PostScript Ideas Worth Resurrecting David Newall <ghostscript@davidnewall.com> - 2024-03-26 16:11 +1100
    Re: PostScript Ideas Worth Resurrecting Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-03-26 06:19 +0000
      Re: PostScript Ideas Worth Resurrecting Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2024-03-26 20:15 +0000

csiph-web