On Thu, Apr 02, 2009 at 07:38:39PM +0100, Dave Howe wrote: > MJ Ray wrote: > > So where did the above "PDF and PS are programming languages" argument > > come from? References, please! > > PDF and PS *are* programming languages, and quite powerful ones. > However, they are entirely interpreted - the output of a pdf "compiler" > would be a static image, not a pdf document, as pdf is the source (if > that makes sense) > > PDF and PS documents are often mechanically generated - they are > transformed from some other document format - but that doesn't mean that > they are "compiled code". The transform is more like a preprocessor pass > - the output is still valid source, just not the same source as was > originally written. > > I would direct you to > http://www.physics.uq.edu.au/people/foster/postscript.html for your > amusement - the first example is a fairly impressive raytracing program > written in postscript.
Or http://www.pugo.org/main/project_pshttpd/ Mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
