squeak printing?
Alan Kay
Alan.Kay at squeakland.org
Wed Feb 6 14:53:12 UTC 2002
Folks --
This has always flabbergasted me. Why isn't the standard print port
on current day OS's represented at least by a pseudofile called
"Print". Even if they "don't know nothin' about objects", this was a
technique that goes all the way back to the idea of streams as
articulated by Chris Strachey in the 60s for !@#$%^ sake! In several
of his OS designs (one of which got implemented at PARC), many things
were mapped to stream protocols, including regular files, and much
other IO.
What is so !@#$%^& difficult about this idea in this day and age? (or
any day and age?)
Cheers,
Alan
At 7:40 AM -0500 2/7/02, David T. Lewis wrote:
>On Thu, Feb 07, 2002 at 11:09:48AM +0100, Hannes Hirzel wrote:
>>
>> > John M McIntosh <johnmci at smalltalkconsulting.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > >I'm wondering if there is any interest in printing from Squeak on the
>> > >mac. It seem Apple has made it a wee bit more friendly to print
>> > >either a bitmap/form or dump postscript into a print stream.
>
> <snip>
>
>> Under Linux one could probably easily feed the output of Marcel Weiher's
>> postscript framework to the system printing queue.
>
>Dumping Postscript to an external print queue would be nice. With a bit
>of hackery on top of CommandShell/OSProcess, it could be implemented as:
>
> aMorph asPostscript pipeTo: 'lpr'
>
>Does OSProcess work on OS/X? and does OS/X use a unixy sort of print
>queueing system? If so, I'll volunteer to do the CommandShell hack.
>
>> Coming up with a solution which works reasonably at on the
>> major platforms is probably the challenge.
>
>Right.
>
>Dave
--
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|