On Aug 30, 2007, at 3:00 , Hugh Perkins wrote:

On 8/30/07, Miguel wrote:

...

What about running Haskell on a PostScript printer? PostScript IS Turing-complete.

Yes, because postscript printers are famous for being really fast ;-)

You youngsters don't remember when PostScript printers *were* faster than the workstations they were connected to. :) -- brandon s. allbery [solaris,freebsd,perl,pugs,haskell] allbery@kf8nh.com system administrator [openafs,heimdal,too many hats] allbery@ece.cmu.edu electrical and computer engineering, carnegie mellon university KF8NH

On Thu, Aug 30, 2007 at 11:03:35AM +0400, Bulat Ziganshin wrote:

Hello Miguel,

Thursday, August 30, 2007, 9:40:08 AM, you wrote:

...

What about running Haskell on a PostScript printer? PostScript IS Turing-complete.

it would be cool to port SOE graphics to PostScript engine :)

I spent some time a few years back figuring out how to use TH to "compile" haskell to postscript, but I didn't really know what I was doing and did a pretty poor job. But I'd love to have a postscript compiler. It's *so* nice to be able to produce compact and readable postscript files (which you could with compiled code, in the sense that the data portion of the file--which is what you want to read anyhow--would be readable). I've often wrote C code to write postscript code, which has the advantage of giving viewable output that also has the raw data in a format that is both computer-readable and human-readable. It'd be much nicer to do this in Haskell. -- David Roundy http://www.darcs.net