On Tue, Apr 02, 2024 at 03:29:28PM -0500, Dave Kemper wrote:
> Subject: paragraph-at-once breaking algorithm (was: Re: *roff hyphenation
> trivia challenge)
>
> On Tue, Apr 2, 2024 at 2:23 PM Steve Izma wrote:
> > I used TeX and LaTeX [...] and the oversetting of lines caused
> > by the periodic
On Tue, Apr 2, 2024 at 1:52 PM Dave Kemper wrote:
> .ll 1n
> \[rq]\%antidisestablishmentarianism\[lq]
> .br
> \%\[rq]antidisestablishmentarianism\[lq]
Ha, if I'd looked at the output of something other than -Tascii, I'd
have realized I got my "lq" and "rq" backwards. But the hyphenation
works th
> Which would be better?
>
> 1. Change GNU troff to not write out a hyphen if the
> hyphenation control escape sequence is at the end
> of the word.
>
> 2. Change GNU troff to not reënable automatic
> hyphenation after encountering a non-initial
> hyphenation control escape se
On Tue, Apr 2, 2024 at 2:23 PM Steve Izma wrote:
> I used TeX and LaTeX [...] and the oversetting of lines caused
> by the periodic failure of the paragraph-justification algorithms
> drove me nuts. [...] The many lines that overset by only a
> few points made proofreading really difficult. That's
> $ printf '.ll 8n\n\\%%antidisestablishmen\\%%tarianism\\%%\n' \
> | nroff -Wbreak | cat -s
> antidisestablishmen-
> tarianism-
>
> I don't think we can tolerate that trailing hyphen.
Yes, that's why we have to use "\&\%" at the end.
At 2024-04-02T22:09:55+0200, Tadziu Hoffmann wrote:
> > Groff already *does* ignore correct hyphenation points,
> > namely before the first "\%" (but allows them afterward).
> >
> > My concern is that if "\%" only allows specifying
> > *additional* hyphenation points, then we have no method
> > of
> Groff already *does* ignore correct hyphenation points,
> namely before the first "\%" (but allows them afterward).
>
> My concern is that if "\%" only allows specifying
> *additional* hyphenation points, then we have no method
> of forbidding hyphenation points that the patterns
> incorrectly
At 2024-04-02T13:29:08-0500, G. Branden Robinson wrote:
> At 2024-04-02T13:42:59-0400, Steve Izma wrote:
> > Also for \% at the beginning of a word, I rarely use this.
>
> I use it frequently in man(7) documents, because the `hw` request is not
> portable/reliable (in theory). Also there's no mec
> I prefer groff's behaviour because I don't ever want correct
> hyphenation points to be ignored. Using \% is almost always a
> correction to the hyphenation logic.
Groff's current behavior is weirdly inconsistent.
It already *does* ignore correct hyphenation points,
namely before the first "\%
On Tue, Apr 02, 2024 at 01:29:05PM -0500, G. Branden Robinson wrote:
> Subject: Re: *roff hyphenation trivia challenge
>
> At 2024-04-02T13:42:59-0400, Steve Izma wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 02, 2024 at 06:51:51PM +0200, Tadziu Hoffmann wrote:
> > > Subject: Re: *roff hyphenation trivia challenge
> >
On Tue, Apr 2, 2024 at 11:53 AM Tadziu Hoffmann
wrote:
> Also, "\&" is not a letter, so a leading "\&"
> should not influence hyphenation at all.
\[rq] is also not a letter, but it affects how \% is interpreted,
giving it its hyphenation-point meaning rather than its
suppress-hyphenation one. I
Hi Steve,
At 2024-04-02T13:42:59-0400, Steve Izma wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 02, 2024 at 06:51:51PM +0200, Tadziu Hoffmann wrote:
> > Subject: Re: *roff hyphenation trivia challenge
>
> > For "antidisestablishmen\%tarianism", groff prints
> >
> > antidisestablishmen-
> > tar-
> > i-
> > an-
>
On Tue, Apr 02, 2024 at 06:51:51PM +0200, Tadziu Hoffmann wrote:
> Subject: Re: *roff hyphenation trivia challenge
> For "antidisestablishmen\%tarianism", groff prints
>
> antidisestablishmen-
> tar-
> i-
> an-
> ism
>
> (which I think is strange), while TeX and Heirloom troff print
>
At 2024-04-02T18:51:51+0200, Tadziu Hoffmann wrote:
> > > Also interesting to see that in this word, the hyphenation
> > > patterns don't suggest a hyphenation opportunity after "anti".
>
> > The leading `\%` prevents that.
>
> Sorry, I meant even without "\%". With a line length of 1 en,
> and
> > Also interesting to see that in this word, the hyphenation
> > patterns don't suggest a hyphenation opportunity after "anti".
> The leading `\%` prevents that.
Sorry, I meant even without "\%". With a line length of 1 en,
and without any "\%" at all, groff prints
an-
tidis-
es-
t
15 matches
Mail list logo
