Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.postscript > #2804 > unrolled thread

A one-page Caesar's Cipher kit, in raw PostScript

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.postscript

Contents

  A one-page Caesar's Cipher kit, in raw PostScript Dylan McNamee <dylan.mcnamee@gmail.com> - 2016-09-13 15:29 -0700
    Re: A one-page Caesar's Cipher kit, in raw PostScript jdaw1 <jdawiseman@gmail.com> - 2016-09-13 15:54 -0700
    Re: A one-page Caesar's Cipher kit, in raw PostScript Lawrence D’Oliveiro <lawrencedo99@gmail.com> - 2016-09-14 03:11 -0700
      Re: A one-page Caesar's Cipher kit, in raw PostScript Dylan McNamee <dylan.mcnamee@gmail.com> - 2016-09-14 07:54 -0700
        Re: A one-page Caesar's Cipher kit, in raw PostScript Lawrence D’Oliveiro <lawrencedo99@gmail.com> - 2016-09-14 13:55 -0700
          Re: A one-page Caesar's Cipher kit, in raw PostScript jdaw1 <jdawiseman@gmail.com> - 2016-09-15 01:06 -0700
            Re: A one-page Caesar's Cipher kit, in raw PostScript Lawrence D’Oliveiro <lawrencedo99@gmail.com> - 2016-09-15 14:46 -0700
              Re: A one-page Caesar's Cipher kit, in raw PostScript jdaw1 <jdawiseman@gmail.com> - 2016-10-01 16:04 -0700
                Re: A one-page Caesar's Cipher kit, in raw PostScript tlvp <mPiOsUcB.EtLlLvEp@att.net> - 2016-10-01 23:10 -0400
          Re: A one-page Caesar's Cipher kit, in raw PostScript Eli the Bearded <*@eli.users.panix.com> - 2016-09-20 22:24 +0000
            Re: A one-page Caesar's Cipher kit, in raw PostScript Martin Leese <please@see.Web.for.e-mail.INVALID> - 2016-09-21 13:36 -0600
              Re: A one-page Caesar's Cipher kit, in raw PostScript Lawrence D’Oliveiro <lawrencedo99@gmail.com> - 2016-09-21 16:27 -0700
    Re: A one-page Caesar's Cipher kit, in raw PostScript Alan <alan.isaac@gmail.com> - 2016-09-22 18:57 -0700
      Re: A one-page Caesar's Cipher kit, in raw PostScript Lawrence D’Oliveiro <lawrencedo99@gmail.com> - 2016-09-22 20:04 -0700
        Re: A one-page Caesar's Cipher kit, in raw PostScript luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-01 13:45 -0700
          Re: A one-page Caesar's Cipher kit, in raw PostScript Lawrence D’Oliveiro <lawrencedo99@gmail.com> - 2016-10-03 04:29 -0700
            Re: A one-page Caesar's Cipher kit, in raw PostScript luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-03 10:41 -0700
              Re: A one-page Caesar's Cipher kit, in raw PostScript Lawrence D’Oliveiro <lawrencedo99@gmail.com> - 2016-10-03 14:49 -0700
                Re: A one-page Caesar's Cipher kit, in raw PostScript luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-03 21:52 -0700
      Re: A one-page Caesar's Cipher kit, in raw PostScript Markus Triska <triska@metalevel.at> - 2016-10-01 22:16 +0200
        Re: A one-page Caesar's Cipher kit, in raw PostScript luser droog <luser.droog@gmail.com> - 2016-10-01 13:30 -0700
        Re: A one-page Caesar's Cipher kit, in raw PostScript Lawrence D’Oliveiro <lawrencedo99@gmail.com> - 2016-10-02 16:07 -0700
          Re: A one-page Caesar's Cipher kit, in raw PostScript Markus Triska <triska@metalevel.at> - 2016-10-03 02:03 +0200
            Re: A one-page Caesar's Cipher kit, in raw PostScript Lawrence D’Oliveiro <lawrencedo99@gmail.com> - 2016-10-02 19:47 -0700
            Re: A one-page Caesar's Cipher kit, in raw PostScript Lawrence D’Oliveiro <lawrencedo99@gmail.com> - 2016-10-04 02:00 -0700
              Re: A one-page Caesar's Cipher kit, in raw PostScript Mark Carroll <mtbc@bcs.org> - 2016-10-04 10:10 +0100
                Re: A one-page Caesar's Cipher kit, in raw PostScript Dylan McNamee <dylan.mcnamee@gmail.com> - 2016-10-04 08:00 -0700
                Re: A one-page Caesar's Cipher kit, in raw PostScript Lawrence D’Oliveiro <lawrencedo99@gmail.com> - 2016-10-04 13:57 -0700
                  Re: A one-page Caesar's Cipher kit, in raw PostScript Mark Carroll <mtbc@bcs.org> - 2016-10-05 09:31 +0100
                    Re: A one-page Caesar's Cipher kit, in raw PostScript Lawrence D’Oliveiro <lawrencedo99@gmail.com> - 2016-10-05 06:37 -0700
                      Re: A one-page Caesar's Cipher kit, in raw PostScript ken <ken@spamcop.net> - 2016-10-05 16:10 +0100
                        Re: A one-page Caesar's Cipher kit, in raw PostScript jdaw1 <jdawiseman@gmail.com> - 2016-10-05 13:37 -0700
                        Re: A one-page Caesar's Cipher kit, in raw PostScript Lawrence D’Oliveiro <lawrencedo99@gmail.com> - 2016-10-05 18:13 -0700
              Re: A one-page Caesar's Cipher kit, in raw PostScript Markus Triska <triska@metalevel.at> - 2016-10-05 22:44 +0200
                Re: A one-page Caesar's Cipher kit, in raw PostScript Lawrence D’Oliveiro <lawrencedo99@gmail.com> - 2016-10-05 18:12 -0700
                  Re: A one-page Caesar's Cipher kit, in raw PostScript Markus Triska <triska@metalevel.at> - 2016-10-08 10:24 +0200
                    Re: A one-page Caesar's Cipher kit, in raw PostScript Lawrence D’Oliveiro <lawrencedo99@gmail.com> - 2016-10-08 11:21 -0700

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#2804 — A one-page Caesar's Cipher kit, in raw PostScript

I'm starting a book about cryptography, math and programming. For the diagrams that it makes sense, I'll be doing them in plain PostScript.

Here's the first one: 

https://raw.githubusercontent.com/dylanmc/CryptoBook/master/src/figures/ReverseCaesarCipherKit.ps

Comments, improvements, whatnot are all welcome.

cheers,
dylan

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#2805

¿“2 div -1 mul” → “-2 div”?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2809

On Wednesday, September 14, 2016 at 10:29:37 AM UTC+12, Dylan McNamee wrote:
> I'm starting a book about cryptography, math and programming. For the
> diagrams that it makes sense, I'll be doing them in plain PostScript.

Why? <http://default-cube.deviantart.com/gallery/53606552/Qahirah-Examples>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2810

On Wednesday, September 14, 2016 at 3:11:36 AM UTC-7, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
> On Wednesday, September 14, 2016 at 10:29:37 AM UTC+12, Dylan McNamee wrote:
> > I'm starting a book about cryptography, math and programming. For the
> > diagrams that it makes sense, I'll be doing them in plain PostScript.
> 
> Why? <http://default-cube.deviantart.com/gallery/53606552/Qahirah-Examples>

I've never seen Qahirah, but I do know TikZ a bit. I'll check out Qahirah.

I do still enjoy writing raw PostScript, though.

best,
dylan

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2811

On Thursday, September 15, 2016 at 2:54:44 AM UTC+12, Dylan McNamee wrote:
> I do still enjoy writing raw PostScript, though.

I used to as well, until I created Qahirah.

While the PostScript graphics model remains influential, it has been superseded by its many, much-improved successors, such as Cairo.

And with modern, flexible, powerful languages like Python, the PostScript language just isn’t worth using any more.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2815

> the PostScript language just isn’t worth using any more.

There’s a lot wrong ( http://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.postscript/OtpsSvpDmt0 ), but it does have the advantage of being widely available. Given a .ps file, many computers can read it. Even work computers on which the user cannot install software.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2816

On Thursday, September 15, 2016 at 8:06:47 PM UTC+12, jdaw1 wrote:
>> the PostScript language just isn’t worth using any more.
> 
> There’s a lot wrong ( http://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.postscript/OtpsSvpDmt0 ),
> but it does have the advantage of being widely available.

So is Python, nowadays. And it comes with this <https://docs.python.org/3/library/>.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2832

Most of my PostScript use is for one task: maintaining a program that makes placemats for Port tastings (and other wines). 
http://www.jdawiseman.com/placemat.html
It is a program that is very fussy about presentation, and presentation in typefaces chosen by the user — so I can’t pre-calculate anything. PDF can’t do those calculations. And because PostScript was once an important language for document transfer, my program can be used and interpreted almost anywhere. 

PostScript is very good at this. But I wouldn’t typeset a book in it: some other software would and should come between me and PostScript. 

As a language it is showing its age, and in many ways (e.g., transparency and Unicode). But there are classes of tasks for which it is still useful.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2834

On Sat, 1 Oct 2016 16:04:17 -0700 (PDT), jdaw1 wrote:

> Most of my PostScript use is for one task: maintaining a program that makes placemats for Port tastings (and other wines). 
> http://www.jdawiseman.com/placemat.html
> It is a program that is very fussy about presentation, and presentation in typefaces chosen by the user — so I can’t pre-calculate anything. PDF can’t do those calculations. And because PostScript was once an important language for document transfer, my program can be used and interpreted almost anywhere. 
> 
> PostScript is very good at this. But I wouldn’t typeset a book in it: some other software would and should come between me and PostScript. 
> 
> As a language it is showing its age, and in many ways (e.g., transparency and Unicode). But there are classes of tasks for which it is still useful.

For that matter, Port, like PostScript, can be "fussy about presentation"
-- and is, in many ways, at its *best* when "showing its age":-) .

Cheers, then, to both :-) ! -- tlvp
-- 
Avant de repondre, jeter la poubelle, SVP.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2823

In comp.lang.postscript, Lawrence Oliveiro <lawrencedo99@gmail.com> wrote:
> While the PostScript graphics model remains influential, it has been superseded by its many,
> much-improved successors, such as Cairo.

What's with your line lengths? What's with your proselytizing against
Postscript in a Postscript newsgroup?

> And with modern, flexible, powerful languages like Python, the PostScript language just
> isn't worth using any more.

When my printer runs Cairo and Python I'll consider it. In the mean-
time, I avoid writing in languages that consider indent levels to be
significant.

Elijah
------
oh wait, Cairo is just *writing your postscript for you* isn't it?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2824

Eli the Bearded wrote:

> In comp.lang.postscript, Lawrence Oliveiro <lawrencedo99@gmail.com> wrote:
>> While the PostScript graphics model remains influential, it has been superseded by its many,
>> much-improved successors, such as Cairo.
> 
> What's with your line lengths? What's with your proselytizing against
> Postscript in a Postscript newsgroup?

This newsgroup is for the *discussion* of
PostScript, not just for its *advocacy*.  I
also think PostScript has been superseded,
but by PDF.  And this happened well over a
decade ago.  (In my view it was killed
because Microsoft Windows could not easily
print a PostScript file.)

Having said that, PostScript still has its
uses.  I recently used it for the first time
in about 20 years to create an image with
text at several scales and rotatations.
PostScript was perfect for this; visit:

http://members.tripod.com/martin_leese/EmailRelaying/index.html
http://members.tripod.com/martin_leese/Test/TestTiling.html

-- 
Regards,
Martin Leese
E-mail: please@see.Web.for.e-mail.INVALID
Web: http://members.tripod.com/martin_leese/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2825

On Thursday, September 22, 2016 at 7:36:05 AM UTC+12, Martin Leese wrote:
> Eli the Bearded wrote:
> 
>> In comp.lang.postscript, Lawrence Oliveiro wrote:
>>> While the PostScript graphics model remains influential, it has been
>>> superseded by its many, much-improved successors, such as Cairo.
> 
> I also think PostScript has been superseded,
> but by PDF.

Both of which Cairo can generate <https://www.cairographics.org/manual/cairo-PostScript-Surfaces.html>, <https://www.cairographics.org/manual/cairo-PDF-Surfaces.html>.

SVG is also quite useful <https://www.cairographics.org/manual/cairo-SVG-Surfaces.html>

> (In my view it was killed because Microsoft Windows could not easily
> print a PostScript file.)

The problems with PostScript were worse than that.

> PostScript was perfect for this; visit:
> 
> http://members.tripod.com/martin_leese/EmailRelaying/index.html
> http://members.tripod.com/martin_leese/Test/TestTiling.html

That kind of thing is easier to do in Python nowadays <http://default-cube.deviantart.com/art/IFS-Tree-612535234>, <http://default-cube.deviantart.com/art/Spirotri-623791721>, <http://default-cube.deviantart.com/art/Truchet-612095093>.

And you can do so much more besides <http://default-cube.deviantart.com/art/Convolution-531929103>, <http://default-cube.deviantart.com/art/Faux-3D-Ball-576929145>.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2826

I'm finding some of the discussion in this thread odd and some of the criticism tangential to the thread.

Saying PDF superseded PS is just plain wrong in a thread about drawing.  It would be true if we were talking about document exchange formats.  But essentially nobody will try to draw by hand in PDF.  Many people find this fun and worthwhile in PS.  

PS is awesome (and fun) for drawing precise figures by hand.  It is not so fun when serious labeling of the drawings must be done. But you can have your cake and eat it too with PyX, a wonderful metalanguage for PS (and PDF, and SVG).  Another interesting option is to draw in PS, import into Mathematica, and add labels there.  It's not yet TeX quality, but it's pretty good.  Mma has the needed primitives (finally), but it's not as fun to draw with.  TikZ is truly great, extremely powerful, and great for including labels and text.  But PS has the edge whenever some programming can help with the drawing process.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2827

On Friday, September 23, 2016 at 1:57:58 PM UTC+12, Alan wrote:
> PS is awesome (and fun) for drawing precise figures by hand.

<https://jasmcole.com/2014/08/02/if-pixar-made-histograms/>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2830

On Thursday, September 22, 2016 at 10:04:23 PM UTC-5, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
> On Friday, September 23, 2016 at 1:57:58 PM UTC+12, Alan wrote:
> > PS is awesome (and fun) for drawing precise figures by hand.
> 
> <https://jasmcole.com/2014/08/02/if-pixar-made-histograms/>

To everybody,

I feel a need to jump into the discussion here
in defense of Lawrence D'Oliveiro. I can easily 
see how his responses can appear trollish by 
usenet standards. But please see his messages in
the thread "hoe can we evangelize postscript?"
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.lang.postscript/tIB5EgGMpuA
and his contributions to other threads. 

He is expressing negative opinions about postscript's
merits vs. other available technologies based on
actual experience with the respective systems.
This is not what trolls do at all.

While championing postscript's virtues, please
take great care not to treat Lawrence as a troll.
We can learn a lot from him if we keep calm and
read closely.

And to Lawrence, remember that this /is/ a postscript
group, so we /can/ get a little sensitive about our "baby".

That is all.

Carry on.

droog

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2841

On Sunday, October 2, 2016 at 9:45:35 AM UTC+13, luser droog wrote:
> To everybody,
> 
> I feel a need to jump into the discussion here
> in defense of Lawrence D'Oliveiro. I can easily 
> see how his responses can appear trollish by 
> usenet standards.

I wonder who mentioned the T-word ... and why ...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2842

On Monday, October 3, 2016 at 6:29:59 AM UTC-5, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
> On Sunday, October 2, 2016 at 9:45:35 AM UTC+13, luser droog wrote:
> > To everybody,
> > 
> > I feel a need to jump into the discussion here
> > in defense of Lawrence D'Oliveiro. I can easily 
> > see how his responses can appear trollish by 
> > usenet standards.
> 
> I wonder who mentioned the T-word ... and why ...

I think I used it first. I thought I saw a storm
brewing, and I thought I could head it off. It 
would be unfortunate if it precipitated the very
conflict I had hoped to forestall.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2844

On Tuesday, October 4, 2016 at 6:41:31 AM UTC+13, luser droog wrote:
>
> On Monday, October 3, 2016 at 6:29:59 AM UTC-5, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
>
>> On Sunday, October 2, 2016 at 9:45:35 AM UTC+13, luser droog wrote:
>
>>> To everybody,
>>> 
>>> I feel a need to jump into the discussion here
>>> in defense of Lawrence D'Oliveiro. I can easily 
>>> see how his responses can appear trollish by 
>>> usenet standards.
>> 
>> I wonder who mentioned the T-word ... and why ...
> 
> I think I used it first. I thought I saw a storm
> brewing, and I thought I could head it off. It 
> would be unfortunate if it precipitated the very
> conflict I had hoped to forestall.

I admire your foresight and prompt action. Because those who resort to personal attacks, only do so because they have run out of rational arguments, don’t you agree?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2845

On Monday, October 3, 2016 at 4:49:35 PM UTC-5, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
> On Tuesday, October 4, 2016 at 6:41:31 AM UTC+13, luser droog wrote:
> >
> > On Monday, October 3, 2016 at 6:29:59 AM UTC-5, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
> >
> >> On Sunday, October 2, 2016 at 9:45:35 AM UTC+13, luser droog wrote:
> >
> >>> To everybody,
> >>> 
> >>> I feel a need to jump into the discussion here
> >>> in defense of Lawrence D'Oliveiro. I can easily 
> >>> see how his responses can appear trollish by 
> >>> usenet standards.
> >> 
> >> I wonder who mentioned the T-word ... and why ...
> > 
> > I think I used it first. I thought I saw a storm
> > brewing, and I thought I could head it off. It 
> > would be unfortunate if it precipitated the very
> > conflict I had hoped to forestall.
> 
> I admire your foresight and prompt action. Because those who resort to personal attacks, only do so because they have run out of rational arguments, don’t you agree?

Too true, or had none to begin with. There's a quote
from Ken Iverson "Never give more than one reason for
something. The last one is always the real one."

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#2828

Alan <alan.isaac@gmail.com> writes:

> Saying PDF superseded PS is just plain wrong in a thread about
> drawing. It would be true if we were talking about document exchange
> formats. But essentially nobody will try to draw by hand in PDF. Many
> people find this fun and worthwhile in PS.

I wholeheartedly agree with this, thank you for putting it so clearly
and succinctly. In fact, I would remove "in a thread about drawing".

I use PostScript a lot for various visualizations. Python and the other
mentioned alternatives are completely out of the question for this, not
only because doing it would be more verbose and less convenient, but
also because people who need the result (i.e., actually see or print the
drawing) may not have Python or other interpreters installed, and my not
be in a position to do so.

PostScript, on the other hand, lets me conveniently express these
visualizations and print them even in very locked-down environments.

Another use case, real-time visualizations of search processes, is
simply not possible in PDF or XML (how can an XML file read from
standard input?), and is also conveniently expressed with PostScript.

Here are a few examples of this:

   https://www.metalevel.at/postscript/animations.html

> But PS has the edge whenever some programming can help with the
> drawing process.

Definitely. Thank you for taking the time to state this so clearly.

All the best,
Markus

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.postscript

csiph-web