long@sask.UUCP (04/02/87)
I now feel that PROFF is superior to all the word processors out for the ATARI. The main feature is the automatic generation of the Table of Contents. However, it is just pitiful when trying to do BOLDFACE or UNDERLINE. I know tht backspace is a handyway to do things so that they work on anything, but it is painfully slow, especially when I know that my printer is being slowed to a tenth of its speed. Another bug is that I can't figure out how to use the ITALICS feature without PROFF doing a line break. Since I have the source to PROFF, I intend on getting into it, and enabling it to do the things it does do CORRECTLY, and to maybe add somemore features, like ITALICS, etc. I am going to set this up to work with an EPSON FX-80 compatible printer, (the industry standard for an ST??). Has anyone already done this?? Am I wasting my time?? Warren -- =-=-=-=-=-Warren Long at University of Saskatchewan, Canada-=-=-=-=- Home: 78 Carleton Dr.,Saskatoon, Sasakatchewan, S7H 3N6 Phone: (306)-955-1237 =-=-=-=-=-U-Email: ...!ihnp4!alberta!sask!long -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
silvert@dalcs.UUCP (04/07/87)
In article <657@sask.UUCP> long@sask.UUCP writes: >However, [proff] is just pitiful when trying to do BOLDFACE or >UNDERLINE. I know tht backspace is a handyway to do things so that >they work on anything, but it is painfully slow, especially when I >know that my printer is being slowed to a tenth of its speed. > >Since I have the source to PROFF, I intend on getting into it, and >enabling it to do the things it does do CORRECTLY, and to maybe >add somemore features, like ITALICS, etc. I am going to set this up >to work with an EPSON FX-80 compatible printer, (the industry >standard for an ST??). 1. the Epson is pretty common, but should not be viewed as a standard. This is evident from the number of alternate printer drivers that are coming out now. Also, many "compatible" printers such as the SMM804 are not fully compatible. If proff gets locked into a single hardware device it will be a step backward, not forward. You should aim for the inclusion of a configuration file, such as that which comes with 1st-Word, or the Degas drivers. These are not difficult to write. Keep in mind that proff is not restricted to the ST. I have it running under Unix, which means that I can run off proff-formatted documents on the high-speed printer at work. 2. alas, the backspace feature does not work on every printer! My C. Itoh ProWriter cannot backspace in bidirectional mode, and probably many bidirectional models have the same problem. All the more reason for configuration files. -- Bill Silvert, Modelling/Statistics Group Bedford Institute of Oceanography, Dartmouth, NS, Canada CDN or BITNET: silvert@cs.dal.cdn -- UUCP: ..!{seismo|utai}!dalcs!silvert ARPA: silvert%dalcs.uucp@seismo.CSS.GOV -- CSNET: silvert%cs.dal.cdn@ubc.csnet
gsschaffer@watdaisy.UUCP (04/07/87)
The "UNIX philosophy" solution is to write a filter, which would read input with backspaces (for bold and underline) and process it into several lines (which are overprinted). I wrote something like this once to print a "troff -Tdumb" document from UNIX on a DEC-20. -greg
oz@yetti.UUCP (Ozan Yigit) (04/08/87)
In article <657@sask.UUCP> long@sask.UUCP (Warren Long) writes: > >I now feel that PROFF is superior to all the word processors out >for the ATARI. The main feature is the automatic generation of the >Table of Contents. > Thank you. I am glad to hear this, although when I wrote it, I did not think that it would be useful. >However, it is just pitiful when trying to do BOLDFACE or >UNDERLINE. I know tht backspace is a handyway to do things so that >they work on anything, but it is painfully slow, especially when I >know that my printer is being slowed to a tenth of its speed. You are absolutely right. It is a bad way of doing things, but at the time, I did not know any better. Call it nroff syndrome. :-) > >Since I have the source to PROFF, I intend on getting into it, and >enabling it to do the things it does do CORRECTLY, and to maybe >add somemore features, like ITALICS, etc. I am going to set this up >to work with an EPSON FX-80 compatible printer, (the industry >standard for an ST??). > >Has anyone already done this?? Am I wasting my time?? > To my knowledge, nobody has done the "right" things to it. Proff has all the problems of a "first" system. It badly needs a re-write, by using ditroff-style structures internally. [ditroff internals is well documented in a btl memo] All changes/additions without a re-write would be (in my opinion) time-wasting hacks. Sigh... I wish I had the time. >Warren oz -- Creativity Usenet: [decvax|ihnp4]!utzoo!yetti!oz never goes anything!seismo!mnetor!yetti!oz unpunished. Bitnet: oz@[yusol|yuyetti].BITNET oz. Phonet: [416] 736-5053 x 3976