On 27-May-2014 15:37:35 Werner LEMBERG wrote: > >> Why not allowing (not forcing) this additional first line also for >> every other files written in some `groff' language document? > > You rather mean: Why not make groff accept such a line to invoke > preprocessors? > > I think that this approach is too simplistic; for example, it doesn't > allow for preprocessor options. > >> That is already done in `grog', but I don't know who to implement >> that in the `groff' program. > > My gut feeling is that improving grog is more useful than spending > time to make groff do the same. > > Werner
My own feelings about this sort of question is that grog is a facility which can have its uses, but is not one which I would recommend for general use. The reason is that it sets up a command line which is formed in terms of requests that grog detects in the troff source file. That is all very well for source files (as for man pages) whose repertoire of requests is limited. However, in general use, users may define their own requests (within a particular macro set) which have the same names as requests which are intrinsic to other macro sets. Then groff may set up the wrong "-m..." option in the command line. Therefore I agree with Werner: Let groff do its own thing, without having to worry about grog! That said, a little light relief! I have on the whole been silent during the various discussion of the last few weeks. Today, quite coincidentally, for nostalgic reasons I visited the website of Ian Pallfreeman who, along with myself and a few others at Manchester at the time, set up the first Linux User Group in the UK (in 1992-93). He and colleagues in the Manchester Computing Centre had been working with UNIX for some time, and eagerly leapt on Linux when it emerged. (And I had been a UNIX convert for some years already, mainly in the first place because it had troff; then I became aware of its other merits). The following page from Ian's website may amuse: http://www.xenopsyche.com/ip/junk/tao.html (and not entirely irrelevant to current efforts ... )! Best wishes to all, Ted. ------------------------------------------------- E-Mail: (Ted Harding) <ted.hard...@wlandres.net> Date: 27-May-2014 Time: 17:24:18 This message was sent by XFMail -------------------------------------------------
