On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 04:59:49PM -0600, Nelson H. F. Beebe wrote:
> >> ...
> >> 'Successor' is not quite the right description, IMO. The key point is
> >> that PDF (which, to be sure, was developed later) is bidirectionally
> >> equivalent and semantically identical to PostScript. You can convert a
> >> .ps file to .pdf one and back, and not lose any substantive content in
> >> either direction. The primary physical difference is that the PDF
> >> version will be stored compressed, while the PS version will not.
> >> ...
>

[cut]

>
> In summary, yes, the transformations PDF-to-PostScript and
> PostScript-to-PDF are possible, but while the end results may be
> similar, they are by no means identical.
>
> For more on PostScript and PDF, see the extensive bibliography at
>

>     http://www.math.utah.edu/pub/tex/bib/postscri.bib

>
> [change .bib to .html for a similar Web view, but with live
> hyperlinks].
>

Great piece on PS and PDF Nelson, indeed. I have loved ps for years,
but my biggest frustration was not being able of finding a way to
implement a 2D random walk in postscript that would show a different
trajectory every time you open it :D (the only problem there is the
seed). You can hack around with a sed script, but that spoils 99% of
the fun...

Maybe you have a pointer for that?

HND

KatolaZ

-- 
[ ~.,_  Enzo Nicosia aka KatolaZ - Devuan -- Freaknet Medialab  ]  
[     "+.  katolaz [at] freaknet.org --- katolaz [at] yahoo.it  ]
[       @)   http://kalos.mine.nu ---  Devuan GNU + Linux User  ]
[     @@)  http://maths.qmul.ac.uk/~vnicosia --  GPG: 0B5F062F  ] 
[ (@@@)  Twitter: @KatolaZ - skype: katolaz -- github: KatolaZ  ]