Follow-up Comment #9, bug #66447 (group groff):

[comment #8 comment #8:]
> I think this [has] a much simpler solution. `ne` should cause a line break
> before breaking the page when invoked with the regular control char, and
> should not cause a line break when invoked with the no-break control char.
> 
> In essence, I expect `ne` to behave like a conditional `bp`, a shorter way
> of writing `if \n[.t]u<(v;DIST) .bp`. The fact that it doesn't behave this
> way betrays user expectations,

Your reasoning seems sound, but I echo Branden's comment #5 recommendation
that you bring this up on the discussion list.  Changing long-established
behavior that is consistent across roff implementations[1] can sometimes break
documents relying on this behavior in ways you might not have anticipated.

[1] I _think_ I can reproduce the behavior in Heirloom troff: Heirloom
hyphenates several words in different places, so its output diverges because
of that.


    _______________________________________________________

Reply to this item at:

  <https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?66447>

_______________________________________________
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.gnu.org/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to