Am 14.01.2011 20:29, schrieb Tadziu Hoffmann: > >> This works fine but it is not a future proof solution :) > > Hmmm. Why not? > > >> what takes me wonder is the question what went wrong with \$_ ? > > I don't know where the "\$_" comes from. It's not in the tbl > manpage, nor in the original tbl paper from Bell Labs.
I got it from UTP page 487. This is my basic source. > Tbl can do two different line fills. "\_" as the only cell > content will draw a line with the width of the column's other > contents; "_" as the only cell content will draw a line the > full width of the column (this is what the UTP says "\$_" > will do; might this be an error?). However, in both cases > the line will be raised to about the center of the lowercase > letters, not below the baseline as you would like to have. I read it this way: |\_| will result in | -------- | |\$_| will result in |------------| > > >> and can some one make the \*_ solution more flexable so it >> will fill the whole column automaticly ? > > What, in your opinion, should determine the width of the column? > > One quick and dirty solution for the automatic fill would be > > .ds _ \v'.1m'\D'l \\n[3w2]u 0'\v'-.1m' > > where 3w0 refers to the width of first column, 3w1 to that > of the second column, 3w2 to that of the third column, etc., > but this is not a solution to be recommended since it depends > on the internals of tbl's implementation. > > so far i understand the \_ and \$_ are tbl commands so it would be fine. >> (i have changed the 6c every time this works for me but may be >> not for others) > > I had thought it was an advantage to be able to specify the > width explicitly, given your example where it was supposed > to be a space reserved for remarks... > It is not a major problem. I had more tables in the same style (sometimes more or less columns). re, wh
