hoh...@arcor.de wrote: > Is this a standard? (.ifg == .if g, .ifq == .if q, ..)
Only in compatibility mode. In default groff mode it is not the same. > .iff doesn't exists, doesn't it? It is discussed as one possibility to be implemented. > .if o and .ifo isn't implemented neither. ?? .if o ??? I think it is. What is .ifo? > Long identifiers (.ifx) are a generally used syntax to show that it > is not original AT&T? At least that ensures compatibility. > .if x versu .ifx I think you did not read the thread carefully. .iff is suggested to ensure compatibility when implementing the new condition syntax. > > name it .iff. Or do you talk about that .iff and .if is used? It > > should be clear that .iff expects a different condition syntax > > than .if. > > It should? By what? By specification :-) > is not that clear. So one will not stringently expect that .if > and .ifx is of the same class of requests. But that is evident for > .if x and .if. It will be specified. If one does not know of .iff and uses .if everything is fine. If a new request name is used for the new syntax compatibility is inhernetly ensured. Again--please read the full thread. > > Anyway users of macro packages (mom, me, mm, ms, man, mdoc etc.) > > should not need conditional statements. So all that here is for very > > few users how design macro packages. Do *they* really need all that > > comfort that goes beyond .iff? I don't understand it. > > Despite you don't support your claims with evidence, this is free > software, don't have to tell me what to do, reading the thread shows > otherwise and at least, you are discriminating me! This has nothing to do with you. There is a limitation in conditionals since more than 40 years (there may have been good reason for implementing it this way). This limitation could just be removed. There is a theoretical possibility that this would introduce incompatibility but it's very unlikely. The current suggestions just goes much too far. Two syntaxes for one thing looks cluttered and like a kludge. This is not evolution which fits to the existing language. I don't tell you anything, this is just a discussion. Carsten
