On Thursday 20 March 2008 22:27, Y T wrote: > I suppose it is going to boil down to a matter of "taste". > Old AT&T pic treated > line from 1,1 then up 1 > exactly the same as > line from 1,1 up 1
As I read pic documentation, these *should* behave differently; the former should plot two line segments, the latter only one. If AT&T pic produces identical results in both cases, then IMO it doesn't behave as documented, so could be considered broken. However, although I use pic quite extensively, I've never used AT&T pic, and I haven't read the original AT&T documentation; this assessment is based on Eric Raymond's pic tutorial, which is provided in the groff package, but supposedly applies to both groff and AT&T pic. > Groff pic 1.19.3 treats them differently. I think the AT&T pic > behavior is more natural/intuitive You are of course entitled to your own opinion, but I must disagree; to me, the inclusion of the `then' keyword implies *two* distinct drawing motions. You expect `line from 1,1 then up 1' to be equivalent to move to 1,1; line up 1 so why not use that construct? It is much more explicitly obvious what is intended, and IME being explicit leads to fewer surprises. > but others may prefer the new groff pic behavior. I definitely do. > Maintaining compatibility with the old AT&T pic is another argument > for restoring the old behavior. Even if AT&T pic is deemed to be broken? Regards, Keith.
