> some time ago, we already improved the terminal renderings of many
> characters, in particular mathematical ones. Having another look
> at groff_char(7) and how it renders with groff versus mandoc, i
> just fixed some issues in mandoc, but for the following cases, i
> think it would be better to
Hi,
some time ago, we already improved the terminal renderings of many
characters, in particular mathematical ones. Having another look
at groff_char(7) and how it renders with groff versus mandoc, i
just fixed some issues in mandoc, but for the following cases, i
think it would be better to twea
Tadziu Hoffmann wrote on Mon, Aug 20, 2018 at 11:22:44PM +0200:
> > I would like to add that I sometimes get the
> > impression that people think that once they use a macro
> > package, raw formatter requests should not be used anymore,
> > as they somehow taint the "purity" of the manuscript.
> >
Hi Tadziu,
Tadziu Hoffmann wrote on Mon, Aug 20, 2018 at 11:22:44PM +0200:
> Peter Schaffter wrote:
>> A macro package does not hide the controls any more than writing
>> macros yourself does. A macro package aggregates the requests
>> needed to perform typesetting functions for convenience, not
> A macro package does not hide the controls any more than writing
> macros yourself does. A macro package aggregates the requests
> needed to perform typesetting functions for convenience, not
> opacity.
Well said. I would like to add that I sometimes get the
impression that people think that
On Mon, Aug 20, 2018, Holger Herrlich wrote:
> First lets assume that here is a diametral contradistinction between
> plain groff and a macro package like mom in terms of user interface.
> The first provides you all the controls to type set. The latter hides
> that controls as much as possible, cla
Sorry, the former mail was an Hot-Key-Accident (sticky keys and
focus follows mouse) and my first reply a misdirecting filter rule.
While it's kinda hard, using few words, to claim that here is use for
private macro sets between plain groff and "don't care" frameworks, I
was trying and then ..
On Sun, Aug 19, 2018 at 03:08:26PM +0100, Ralph Corderoy wrote:
> Hi Colin,
>
> > Writing "== -1" implies a reading that any other value would indicate
> > success;
>
> Or it implies it's being coded to the spec.
If your program explicitly handles unspecified return values and handles
those as a
Hi Jeff,
> I think it’s better to use “'” than a space because what’s going on is
> more readily apparent—at least to those who understand the idiom.
And even to those that don't, it stands out more than whitespace,
especially given whitespace after the `.' is more common these days for
control-f
