Re: gEDA-user: PostScript patch for Windows ps.c attached

[Bob Paddock <graceindustries@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 8:08 AM, Peter Clifton <pcjc2@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-03-10 at 20:17 -0400, Bob Paddock wrote:
>>
>>  static const char * const calib_lines[] = {
>> -  "%!PS-Adobe\n",
>> +  "%!PS-Adobe-3.0\n",
>
> Is this saying we are using level 3 postscript?
>
> Do we use level 3 postscript commands?

I'd have to locate an old standard, which would be *really* old,
to not be Level-3, to check for sure as I don't know what
was not in Level-1.  I was using as my reference
Adobe's "Red Book" and "Blue Book", which were from around ~1998.
I'll see if I can find a Level-1 reference.

> The other (stylistic) point I noted from your patch was that you comment
> on the DSC emissions _after_ printing them, e.g.:

Yes.

>> I don't feel too strongly on the issue (can't speak for other PCB
> developers), but usually you see the comments preceding the code they
> relate to, or on the same line.

In my own code I generally put them where they seem least disruptive
to the flow of the code.  I can move them and submit an other patch,
I don't have any strong reason for doing it one way or the other.


_______________________________________________
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user