Ralph --
On Fri, Nov 21, 2014, Ralph Corderoy wrote:
> > But new users to troff, and I think Peter's Mom can attract them,
At 90, I'm sure my mom will be thrilled to hear you think so. :)
--
Peter Schaffter
http://www.schaffter.ca
On Fri, Nov 21, 2014, Ralph Corderoy wrote:
> Oh, I think a basic .if is still useful to the novice who will probably
> want to conditionally do something, e.g. "DRAFT" heading, etc. Does mom
> aim to remove the need for any non-mom-macro command, e.g. `.ds company
> Google, Inc.'?
No, not at all
On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 01:24:36PM +, Ralph Corderoy wrote:
> :
> > Indeed, this is true for (almost) all groff header files. For some
> > reason, Clark decided to code it that way, not providing guards
> > against loading header files multiple times. I haven't changed that.
>
> Gets
Ralph Corderoy writes:
>
> Gets my vote. :-) It's a Bell Labs style of programming seen widely in
> Plan 9. Rob Pike has also written about it since the 1980s. Header
> files should not be #include'd multiple times; nor should they #include
> others. They should state their needs and be #inc
> Oh, I think a basic .if is still useful to the novice who will probably
> want to conditionally do something, e.g. "DRAFT" heading, etc. Does mom
> aim to remove the need for any non-mom-macro command, e.g. `.ds company
> Google, Inc.'?
Ok, I agree. But there might not be much of that statemen
Hi Carsten,
> > But new users to troff, and I think Peter's MOM can attract them,
> > could well have been raised on C at best and Java at worst. If
> > we're to have them step beyond the friendly macro package into doing
> > a bit of troff, getting involved, helping keep interest going,
> > perh
Hi Ralph,
> But new users to troff, and I think Peter's MOM can attract them, could
> well have been raised on C at best and Java at worst. If we're to have
> them step beyond the friendly macro package into doing a bit of troff,
> getting involved, helping keep interest going, perhaps specialis
> But new users to troff, and I think Peter's Mom can attract them,
In mitigation, over here in England we say "Mum", so the unfortunate
interpretation of that didn't register. Sorry! :-)
Cheers, Ralph.
Hi,
Tadziu's opinion matters to me; I read every bit of troff he posts here
because I normally learn something. :-) So I think it's worth trying
to explain why the programming language side of troff could benefit from
modernisation.
> I say we shouldn't change the interpretation of numeric exp
Hi Werner,
> > It's IMO a Groff problem that is not specific to MinGW:
> > stringclass.h is not idempotent.
>
> Indeed, this is true for (almost) all groff header files. For some
> reason, Clark decided to code it that way, not providing guards
> against loading header files multiple times. I h
10 matches
Mail list logo
