🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1511@chinacat.Unicom.COM> woody@chinacat.Unicom.COM (Woody Baker @ Eagle Signal) writes:
>This technique of skipping headers and such, by watching for (%%%) in the
>input stream fails on the NEC 890.  It will never see them.  Cassidy and
>Greene's fonts don't work because of it.  You can send one down to the
>printer, but it will happily eat anything else.  Apparently the %'s
>are not captured by the interpreter.  It appears that comments are
>just tossed away.  I posted some code to the net some months back that
>demonstrated this, but I never saw any reply as to whether or not other
>people saw the same thing.

We've been around this before.

You posted a while ago that that the LC-890 stripped out
comments in the scanner and they couldn't be read by the
interpreter.

I posted a test program that would decide whether or not the
% comments were indeed getting through.  At least three people
independently confirmed that it worked on their NEC LC-890
printers.  You say "I never saw any reply...".  Maybe you were
out of town that week, or maybe you don't read followup postings
to your own postings, since it was the next day that these all
appeared.

Summary:  it's not the LC-890, it's either your analysis of the
problem, your spooler, the fonts themselves, or something else.
It's possible that the fonts are using "readstring" and expecting
a precise number of bytes, and some conversion of carriage-return
newline sequences to just newline might make the byte count wrong,
as a guess.  It is a reasonable technique to read the input stream
until you see a % flag, as Ben suggested.

Glenn

-- 
 Glenn Reid				RightBrain Software
 glenn@heaven.woodside.ca.us		PostScript/NeXT developers
 ..{adobe,next}!heaven!glenn		415-851-1785