|
> First of all I DO NOT understand why it should work like that
> within v 2.3 & 2.4; during 2.1 it was working in 'the good
> old fashioned way'. Anyway 8-bit char set has �, � and �.
> The method has cost a lot to our support people, some LN03
> problems and now a problem with VTX.
It's the way that the WPS-PLUS V3.0 and V3.1 formatter creates the listing
file, and as you have observed it seems to be different from WPS-PLUS V2.1.
The versions of WPS-PLUS integrated into ALL-IN-1 are:
ALL-IN-1 V2.1 -- WPS-PLUS V2.1
ALL-IN-1 V2.3 -- WPS-PLUS V3.0
ALL-IN-1 V2.4 -- WPS-PLUS V3.1
> OA$FORMATTER is working the same way.
The same WPS-PLUS formatter routine is linked into OA$FORMATTER and
OA$MAIN. It is to be expected that when OA$FORMATTER is performing
WPS-PLUS formatting that the same results will occur.
> To the solving part (at last): What I want is to find a way
> to generate 'real' � (decimal 196 in DEC Multinational Character
> Set) to the output file instead of <ESC>(>^ND^O.
You could create a new WPS-PLUS Printer Character Table which uses DEC
Multinational Characters directly, and then modify the ALL-IN-1 Printer
entries to use this WPS-PLUS printer table when printing to the VTX$QUEUE
printer destination.
Since this is an issue with the WPS-PLUS formatter you may get further help
in the WPS-PLUS conference.
Richard
|
|
> It's the way that the WPS-PLUS V3.0 and V3.1 formatter creates the listing
> file, and as you have observed it seems to be different from WPS-PLUS V2.1.
Yes, I know that. But I am wondering why not to use Multinational
characters instead using DEC Supplemental Graphic Character Set.
> You could create a new WPS-PLUS Printer Character Table which uses DEC
> Multinational Characters directly, and then modify the ALL-IN-1 Printer
> entries to use this WPS-PLUS printer table when printing to the VTX$QUEUE
> printer destination.
This is exactly what I did first thing in the morning. For those
who are interested: the characters which need to be modified are
196 (�), 197 (�), 214 (�), 228 (�), 229 (�) and 246 (�).
Table should look like this after modifications:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHR Cell 1 Cell 2 Cell 3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
196 196 -1 -1
197 197 -1 -1
.
.
thanks
risto
|