Hi,
> +Attempting to insert the @samp{!} operator
> +within the expression results in a
> +...@samp{numeric expression expected} warning. This
> +maintains bug-compatibility
> +with old versions of @code{troff}.
It is not a bug that it works that way in troff.
> +...@example
> +.nr X 1
> +.nr Y 0
> +.\" This does not work as expected
> +.if (\n[X])&(!\n[Y]) .nop X only
> +.
> +.\" Use this construct instead
> +.if (\n[X]=1)&(\n[Y]=0) .nop X only
> +...@endexample
Perhaps this can have values other than 1 for X and use Tadziu's (1-\nX)
with an explanation of why.
> +This maintains bug-compatibility with AT&T
> +.IR troff .
Ditto.
Cheers,
Ralph.
