Follow-up Comment #2, bug #66864 (group groff):
[comment #1 comment #1:]
> [comment #0 original submission:]
>> First, let's establish that this is a low-priority item.
>
> No argument.
>
>> Approximate output is a form of debugging output.
>
> It's accurate to call it a previewing tool or a developer's tool (or, I guess
> the equivalent for someone who develops using roff, a typographer's tool). I
> think calling it a debugging tool shortchanges it, as it has uses beyond
> what's traditionally considered debugging. Especially when piped through
> subsequent commands or scripts, approximate output gives the user power to
> improve the typeset output, not merely to find bugs in it. (For instance, I
> have a two-line perl script that reads "groff -a" output and lists all pages
> beginning with a widow.) See item 2 of the original submission of bug #55278
> (and email threads that it links to).
>
> None of this raises the priority of this ticket; I just want to squelch the
> idea that -a output is limited to debugging.
Fair point, Dave. >>goozhe<< Idea squelched.
_______________________________________________________
Reply to this item at:
<https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?66864>
_______________________________________________
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.gnu.org/
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
