Follow-up Comment #4, bug #66051 (group groff): [comment #2 comment #2:] > It makes total sense and also seems a duplicate of bug #42870. I guess I'm not seeing what's "more modest" about that one.
The fix I have in mind for bug #42870 will address (I have it pending, with passing regression test) this issue: input=". .ec @ .ll 1n r@['e]sum@['e] .hcode @['e] e r@['e]sum@['e] .hcode @['E] @['e] R@['E]SUM@['E] .pl @n[nl]u ." output=$(echo "$input" | "$groff" -a -ww -Wbreak) echo "$output" # Expected output: # # <beginning of page> # r<'e>sum<'e> # r<'e><hy> # sum<'e> # R<'E><hy> # SUM<'E> Whereas *this* one will make possible: .hcode \[ss] \[ss] The fix I have in mind for bug #42780 does not. > If anything, the way it's worded, _this_ one seems more modest, as it's asking for support of only special characters, and only for .hcode, whereas #42870 (per its original submission wording) asks for support of "any characters entities," for .hw and .hcode. I may still be having trouble understanding completely what that one's asking for, and/or whether making the change here will cause the desired `hw` functionality to just "shake out" or not. I'll need another test for that. _______________________________________________________ Reply to this item at: <https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?66051> _______________________________________________ Message sent via Savannah https://savannah.gnu.org/
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature