> On Tue, 24 Jan 95 14:36:00 PST, Doore, Daniel [MIS] said: > > Probably because it's a darn site quicker to play 'shift the ASCII > > character into memory' than prat about with bespoke compression code. > > Which brings us back to my original question which put forward the > supposition that he didn't "have to" hack the printer code but it was > less bother than formulating a routine to decompress the code...
Then why did you argue the case for writing or "stealing" the code? But that's just me being argumentative >:->> D. > imc >
