Re: PostScript wrappers

[Chris B. Vetter]

On Mon, 19 Jan 2004 20:03:46 -0700
Adam Fedor <fedor@doc.com> wrote:
> On Monday, January 19, 2004, at 05:16 PM, Chris B. Vetter wrote:
[...]
> > My question is, whether there are plans to write a wrapper for the
> > current backend(s) that implements these, or whether it's even
> > feasible to do so.
> It's really not feasible in the general case, since a psw file can 
> contain any type of PostScript - thus we'd need a full PS interpreter.
> pswrap translates the psw file to binary sequences that the PS 
> interpreter can read, so we'd have to write something to decode that
> as well. Pretty hard.

Yes, I thought so. But in this case, does it even make much sense to
have the <instance>_PSWRAP_FILES 'command' in -make if it cannot be
properly/completely supported?

> The best I can think of is perhaps writing our own limited PSW->C 
> translator. Most psw files are pretty simple so it would probably work
> most of the time.

Wouldn't it suffice to check the headers in -dgs and try to implement
the functions as wrappers to what we already have in -back?

-- 
Chris