I haven't used enscript for quite awhile. I used it all the time at work to
print code without having to use a text editor to do it. Here's part of a
script to convert a text file to PDF, with line numbers and a narrow font
suitable to printing. Blank lines and some info output removed.

#!/bin/bash
FONT="Monospace8"
OPTIONS="q -B -C -G -T3"
for FILENAME in $* ; do
# Get the whole filename, then strip off the whole file extension.
BASENAME="${FILENAME%%.*}"
EXTENSION="${FILENAME##*.}"
EOPTION="E"
[ "$EXTENSION" == "hpp" ] && EOPTION="Ecpp"
[ "$EXTENSION" == "h" ] && EOPTION="Ec"
enscript -$OPTIONS -$EOPTION -f $FONT -p - $FILENAME | ps2pdf - $BASENAME.pdf
done

--
A selection from the Taoist Writings:
"Lao-Tan asked Confucius: `What do you mean by benevolence and righteousness?'
Confucius said: `To be in one's inmost heart in kindly sympathy with all
things; to love all men and allow no selfish thoughts: this is the nature
of benevolence and righteousness.'"
-- Kwang-tzu

On Wed, 23 Oct 2024 08:54:11 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

> I haven't used enscript for quite awhile. I used it all the time at work to
> print code without having to use a text editor to do it. Here's part of a
> script to convert a text file to PDF, with line numbers and a narrow font
> suitable to printing. Blank lines and some info output removed.
>
> #!/bin/bash
> FONT="Monospace8"
> OPTIONS="q -B -C -G -T3"
>

You must write very short lines.

The default page for enscript is A4 and that is very near to
Letter size of 8.5" x 11".

Most code, if we include the indents, has long lines of far more
than 80 characters that even with a size 8 font will exceed the
bounds of an A4 page. Enscript will wrap them by default and the
result is sort of ugly.

One could specify "landscape" orientation but that may not solve
the problem entirely.

The only other possibility would be to specify an A1 page size.

My philosophy is just to keep it in text format.

Enscript, and equivalents such as aps, paps, etc., are certainly
very capable programs, but who the fuck actually PRINTS nowadays?

Printing is, or should be, dead. Like facsimile (fax) it is kept
alive by throwback idiots that cannot adapt to change.

--
Systemd: solving all the problems that you never knew you had.

Farley Flud wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On Wed, 23 Oct 2024 08:54:11 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>
>> I haven't used enscript for quite awhile. I used it all the time at work to
>> print code without having to use a text editor to do it. Here's part of a
>> script to convert a text file to PDF, with line numbers and a narrow font
>> suitable to printing. Blank lines and some info output removed.
>>
>> #!/bin/bash
>> FONT="Monospace8"
>> OPTIONS="q -B -C -G -T3"
>
> You must write very short lines.

I generally keep them under 80 characters. Much easier to read, for
one thing.

> The default page for enscript is A4 and that is very near to
> Letter size of 8.5" x 11".
>
> Most code, if we include the indents, has long lines of far more
> than 80 characters that even with a size 8 font will exceed the
> bounds of an A4 page. Enscript will wrap them by default and the
> result is sort of ugly.
>
> One could specify "landscape" orientation but that may not solve
> the problem entirely.
>
> The only other possibility would be to specify an A1 page size.
>
> My philosophy is just to keep it in text format.

Well, printing text (e.g. from vim) doesn't (as far as I know) allow
for changing the font.

> Enscript, and equivalents such as aps, paps, etc., are certainly
> very capable programs, but who the fuck actually PRINTS nowadays?

I do, in limited quantities.

> Printing is, or should be, dead. Like facsimile (fax) it is kept
> alive by throwback idiots that cannot adapt to change.

:-D

Sometimes it's easier, when going through a big script, to have the print
out to mark up as one makes the script work. Then later apply the fixes to the
file.

--
My analyst told me that I was right out of my head,
But I said, "Dear Doctor, I think that it is you instead.
Because I have got a thing that is unique and new,
To prove it I'll have the last laugh on you.
'Cause instead of one head -- I've got two.
And you know two heads are better than one.

On Wed, 23 Oct 2024 14:09:01 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

>
> Sometimes it's easier, when going through a big script, to have the print
> out to mark up as one makes the script work. Then later apply the fixes to the
> file.
>

That's the same old excuse.

It seems that you haven't gotten fully accustomed to the digital way
of doing things.

There are ways, if only totally ad hoc, of doing the same with text
editors.

In my opinion, there should NEVER be a need to rise up from ones chair
to peruse a ridiculous print.

--
Systemd: solving all the problems that you never knew you had.

Farley Flud wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On Wed, 23 Oct 2024 14:09:01 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>
>> Sometimes it's easier, when going through a big script, to have the print
>> out to mark up as one makes the script work. Then later apply the fixes to the
>> file.
>
> That's the same old excuse.
>
> It seems that you haven't gotten fully accustomed to the digital way
> of doing things.

There is no "digital way". It's doing some light editing or thinking on a pad
of paper or doing the same on a (heavier) tablet. One hand versus two hands.
But otherwise an isomorphic paradigm.

> There are ways, if only totally ad hoc, of doing the same with text
> editors.

It's difficult to draw arrows across a page, or draw a little diagram, in a
text editor.

Editing a printout on paper rather than editing in a text editor in a laptop is
a lot easier when sitting on the crapper. Or at the doctor's office.

> In my opinion, there should NEVER be a need to rise up from ones chair
> to peruse a ridiculous print.

No wonder your ass is so ponderous! :-D Get up off it and stand! Isn't your
fitness watch telling you that?

--
Will it improve my CASH FLOW?

On Wed, 23 Oct 2024 16:42:29 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

> No wonder your ass is so ponderous! :-D Get up off it and stand! Isn't
> your fitness watch telling you that?

It took the app forever to update just now. Yup, 54 minutes on a outdoor
bike as usual. In truth it was 54 minutes pushing a lawnmower which always
shows as a bike. This time ouf year mowing the lawn means mulching the
leaves and deer turds. Great things mulching mowers.

rBowman: mulching the leaves and deer turds.

Would Missoula arrest you if you shut a deer from your window ?

rbowman wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On Wed, 23 Oct 2024 16:42:29 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>
>> No wonder your ass is so ponderous! :-D Get up off it and stand! Isn't
>> your fitness watch telling you that?
>
> It took the app forever to update just now. Yup, 54 minutes on a outdoor
> bike as usual. In truth it was 54 minutes pushing a lawnmower which always
> shows as a bike. This time ouf year mowing the lawn means mulching the
> leaves and deer turds. Great things mulching mowers.

My watch has one thing that bugs me. Let's say I go walking without activating
the "Walking" app. It counts the steps, but adds in only a few calories.
If I activate it, then it counts calories.

I need to know if I burned enough calories to deserve a couple beers!

--
A little retrospection shows that although many fine, useful software systems
have been designed by committees and built as part of multipart projects,
those software systems that have excited passionate fans are those that are
the products of one or a few designing minds, great designers. Consider Unix,
APL, Pascal, Modula, the Smalltalk interface, even Fortran; and contrast them
with Cobol, PL/I, Algol, MVS/370, and MS-DOS.
-- Fred Brooks

On Thu, 24 Oct 2024 06:47:32 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

>
> My watch has one thing that bugs me. Let's say I go walking without activating
> the "Walking" app. It counts the steps, but adds in only a few calories.
> If I activate it, then it counts calories.
>

I really hate to burst your bubble, but walking, even walking a few miles,
burns very little calories. (I won't go into the physics.)

The only exception would be walking up a steep hill.

Also I cannot resist condemning another gadget freak. What rational
and sophisticated human being would ever waste money on a useless
fitness watch?

--
Systemd: solving all the problems that you never knew you had.

On Thu, 24 Oct 2024 02:45:54 -0700 (Seattle), Relf wrote:

> rBowman: mulching the leaves and deer turds.
>
> Would Missoula arrest you if you shut a deer from your window ?

The city of Missoula would. Physically that's a very small part of
Missoula county. Around the 4th of July you can tell where the city
boundaries are by the fireworks stands that spring up a few feet on the
other side of the line.

In Helena they might turn a blind eye.

https://www.ktvh.com/news/mtn-outdoors/deer-culling-starts-in-helena

The deer in Helena are mule deer which are more aggressive. The Missoula
urban deer are whitetails which are more docile and don't cause as many
problems so trying to introduce a cull hasn't been popular.

On Thu, 24 Oct 2024 06:47:32 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

> My watch has one thing that bugs me. Let's say I go walking without
> activating the "Walking" app. It counts the steps, but adds in only a
> few calories.
> If I activate it, then it counts calories.
>
> I need to know if I burned enough calories to deserve a couple beers!

I don't even look at the calories. I don't think it's very accurate. I
never activate the walking app and let it autoselect if it feels like it.
That can be amusing. A couple of weeks ago I took a 7 mile walk up and
down a couple of ridges scoring a lot of fitness minutes. It came up with
a 30 minute walk for the time I spent going downhill back to the car.

Farley Flud wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On Thu, 24 Oct 2024 06:47:32 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>
>>
>> My watch has one thing that bugs me. Let's say I go walking without activating
>> the "Walking" app. It counts the steps, but adds in only a few calories.
>> If I activate it, then it counts calories.
>
> I really hate to burst your bubble, but walking, even walking a few miles,
> burns very little calories. (I won't go into the physics.)

:-D You don't know squat.

> The only exception would be walking up a steep hill.
>
> Also I cannot resist condemning another gadget freak. What rational
> and sophisticated human being would ever waste money on a useless
> fitness watch?

I find the watch very useful. Among other things, it displays incoming phone
calls, allowing me to zap the call (hang up) without digging in my pocket for
the phone.

Gadget freak :-D

--
Real programmers don't bring brown-bag lunches. If the vending machine
doesn't sell it, they don't eat it. Vending machines don't sell quiche.

On 10/24/2024 2:33 PM, Lameass Know-it-all Larry Piet wrote:

> On Thu, 24 Oct 2024 06:47:32 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>
>>
>> My watch has one thing that bugs me. Let's say I go walking without activating
>> the "Walking" app. It counts the steps, but adds in only a few calories.
>> If I activate it, then it counts calories.
>>
>
> I really hate to burst your bubble, but walking, even walking a few miles,
> burns very little calories. (I won't go into the physics.)

You didn't burst any bubbles, lameass.

Most of the know-it-all bullshit you post is already known to everyone here.

Everyone knows calories burned while walking or jogging depend on your
bodyweight and pace and age and metabolism.

> The only exception would be walking up a steep hill.

No, that's not the only exception.

> Also I cannot resist condemning another gadget freak. What rational
> and sophisticated human being would ever waste money on a useless
> fitness watch?

Aren't you the gadget asshole with 6 computers?

Only the 2 Windows systems are worth anything economically, of course;
the 4 GuhNoo crapboxes are just playtime tinkertoys.

ps GFIA

On 10/23/24 09:15, Farley Flud wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Oct 2024 08:54:11 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>
>> I haven't used enscript for quite awhile. I used it all the time at work to
>> print code without having to use a text editor to do it. Here's part of a
>> script to convert a text file to PDF, with line numbers and a narrow font
>> suitable to printing. Blank lines and some info output removed.
>>
>> #!/bin/bash
>> FONT="Monospace8"
>> OPTIONS="q -B -C -G -T3"
>>
>
> You must write very short lines.
>
> The default page for enscript is A4 and that is very near to
> Letter size of 8.5" x 11".
>
> Most code, if we include the indents, has long lines of far more
> than 80 characters that even with a size 8 font will exceed the
> bounds of an A4 page. Enscript will wrap them by default and the
> result is sort of ugly.
>
> One could specify "landscape" orientation but that may not solve
> the problem entirely.
>
> The only other possibility would be to specify an A1 page size.
>
> My philosophy is just to keep it in text format.
>
> Enscript, and equivalents such as aps, paps, etc., are certainly
> very capable programs, but who the fuck actually PRINTS nowadays?
>
> Printing is, or should be, dead. Like facsimile (fax) it is kept
> alive by throwback idiots that cannot adapt to change.
>
>
>

Like most of U.S. government agencies. Especially social security admin.

You're still young. Wait a few more years and you'll see how you fall
back on printing and regular mail. They give you no other choice because
those offices are all run by semi-literate old fat Black women.

On 10/24/24 13:33, Farley Flud wrote:
> I really hate to burst your bubble, but walking, even walking a few miles,
> burns very little calories. (I won't go into the physics.)
>
> The only exception would be walking up a steep hill.

There's more to walking (or any exercise) than burning calories :)

But burning calories is such an American thing, cause people here are
all fat. So ..

On 2024-10-24 11:33 p.m., Physfitfreak wrote:
> On 10/23/24 09:15, Farley Flud wrote:
>> On Wed, 23 Oct 2024 08:54:11 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>
>>> I haven't used enscript for quite awhile. I used it all the time at
>>> work to
>>> print code without having to use a text editor to do it. Here's part
>>> of a
>>> script to convert a text file to PDF, with line numbers and a narrow
>>> font
>>> suitable to printing. Blank lines and some info output removed.
>>>
>>> #!/bin/bash
>>> FONT="Monospace8"
>>> OPTIONS="q -B -C -G -T3"
>>>
>>
>> You must write very short lines.
>>
>> The default page for enscript is A4 and that is very near to
>> Letter size of 8.5" x 11".
>>
>> Most code, if we include the indents, has long lines of far more
>> than 80 characters that even with a size 8 font will exceed the
>> bounds of an A4 page.  Enscript will wrap them by default and the
>> result is sort of ugly.
>>
>> One could specify "landscape" orientation but that may not solve
>> the problem entirely.
>>
>> The only other possibility would be to specify an A1 page size.
>>
>> My philosophy is just to keep it in text format.
>>
>> Enscript, and equivalents such as aps, paps, etc., are certainly
>> very capable programs, but who the fuck actually PRINTS nowadays?
>>
>> Printing is, or should be, dead.  Like facsimile (fax) it is kept
>> alive by throwback idiots that cannot adapt to change.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> Like most of U.S. government agencies. Especially social security admin.
>
> You're still young. Wait a few more years and you'll see how you fall
> back on printing and regular mail. They give you no other choice because
> those offices are all run by semi-literate old fat Black women.

I can confirm that black women are incompetent. By the way, because they
are unimportant, the adjective black when referring to people of black
skin should not be capitalized.

For me, it is easy to test how incompetent black people are: you just
have to order food from the same type of restaurant in different areas
of town. For example, if you go to the Tim Horton's here in
Rivière-des-Prairies, most of the employees are black. Therefore, if you
go to the drive-through and order a medium coffee with two milks and two
sugars, you're likely to get a cappuccino. Go a little bit farther and
order from the same restaurant in Anjou, and you'll get exactly what you
ordered because the employees are White. Similarly, if you order from
McDonald's and select the one where the black employees are, something
will be missing or you'll end up with an entirely different order. Make
the same order from the one in Anjou, and you'll get everything you
asked for and it'll taste better because you won't have to fear that you
might be contaminated by the parasite that makes black people unable to
speak English properly and causes them to walk like apes.

--
CrudeSausage
Paleoconservative, Catholic, Christ is king.

Le 23-10-2024, Farley Flud <ff@linux.rocks> a écrit :
>
> In my opinion, there should NEVER be a need to rise up from ones chair
> to peruse a ridiculous print.

And then, not so long ago, you were the one trying to use something else
than cups to print. Why that if you don't have a need to print? Just to
the purpose of contradicting yourself once again?

--
Si vous avez du temps à perdre :
https://scarpet42.gitlab.io

On Fri, 25 Oct 2024 08:48:08 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:

> For me, it is easy to test how incompetent black people are: you just
> have to order food from the same type of restaurant in different areas
> of town.

What flavor of black? While setting up a molding system in Mississauga I
worked with a black Jamaican millwright. It would be hard for him to pass
at a KKK meeting but his view of US blacks was similar.

On 25 Oct 2024 21:43:26 GMT, rbowman wrote:

>
> What flavor of black? While setting up a molding system in Mississauga I
> worked with a black Jamaican millwright. It would be hard for him to pass
> at a KKK meeting but his view of US blacks was similar.
>

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!

The stupid know-nothing know-it-all is at it again.

As I declared previously, all one has to do is mention a time
or a place and that Blowman asshole will jump on it with a
fabricated tale of his "experience."

What a fucking phony!

That dipshit could only fool idiots, and that's probably why
he posts to the lackeys of C.O.L.A.

On 2024-10-25 5:43 p.m., rbowman wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Oct 2024 08:48:08 -0400, CrudeSausage wrote:
>
>> For me, it is easy to test how incompetent black people are: you just
>> have to order food from the same type of restaurant in different areas
>> of town.
>
> What flavor of black? While setting up a molding system in Mississauga I
> worked with a black Jamaican millwright. It would be hard for him to pass
> at a KKK meeting but his view of US blacks was similar.

Haitians, the absolute dumbest breed of black person. I actually like
Jamaicans.

--
CrudeSausage
Paleoconservative, Catholic, Christ is king.

On 10/25/24 17:07, Diego Garcia wrote:
> On 25 Oct 2024 21:43:26 GMT, rbowman wrote:
>
>>
>> What flavor of black? While setting up a molding system in Mississauga I
>> worked with a black Jamaican millwright. It would be hard for him to pass
>> at a KKK meeting but his view of US blacks was similar.
>>
>
> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!
>
> The stupid know-nothing know-it-all is at it again.
>
> As I declared previously, all one has to do is mention a time
> or a place and that Blowman asshole will jump on it with a
> fabricated tale of his "experience."
>
> What a fucking phony!
>
> That dipshit could only fool idiots, and that's probably why
> he posts to the lackeys of C.O.L.A.
>
>

Hehe :)

He enjoys his groupies. I don't enjoy my groupies. I kill file them.

Hey whatever happened to your videos you were uploading. Did you upload
a few more than those first three?