Just to clarify: my suggestion to port Groff to JavaScript was really a
joke. If one desires a JS-hosted Troff solution, the sane approach would be
to:
- *Node + Browsers:* Transpile C++ to JavaScript with Emscripten
- *Node only:* Create a native binding to C++
- *Prospective future: *Us
Hi,
Ralph Corderoy wrote on Mon, Jan 08, 2018 at 05:29:06PM +:
> Bertrand Garrigues wrote:
>> Again, if you feel you are interested in developing into groff I think
>> you should not wait such a long time. There are some big topics
> And some smaller ones, I expect.
Exactly. If you are in
Hi John,
John Gardner wrote on Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 07:24:25PM +1100:
> I'm wondering how many people here might react if I suggested porting
> the entire Geoff codebase to JavaScript...
My comment would be that would be a terrible choice. The Node
package manager is among the least secure pack
Last year I used JavaScript and Web technologies to create an interactive,
high-quality rendition of gropdf's output. I implemented this as a
postprocessor with hand-written transition tables which all a single-pass
through the raw DITROFF output (the "intermediate representation") For
Deri Jane's
> John Gardner wrote:
>
> I'm wondering how many people here might react if I suggested porting the
> entire Geoff codebase to JavaScript…
LOL go for it! I often joked that nothing useful was ever written in Javascript.
That hasn’t been true for a while, but it would be cool to see how you han
I'm wondering how many people here might react if I suggested porting the
entire Geoff codebase to JavaScript...
.
On 9 Jan 2018 6:19 am, "Werner LEMBERG" wrote:
>
> >> Also, groff code is quite old and looks more like 'C with class'
> >> and doesn't use templates
> >
> > Yes, that's in it's f
>> Also, groff code is quite old and looks more like 'C with class'
>> and doesn't use templates
>
> Yes, that's in it's favour, as you say.
Indeed! Today, I would vote for introducing templates in a very light
way, but in general I like the groff coding style.
Werner
Hi Stephanie,
I was going to avoid being OT, but Bertrand wrote:
> > And since Groff is getting distributed widely and C++ is only
> > getting more and more popular
>
> Little disgression (of course, personal opinion, nothing objective): I
> think that C++ will face strong competition from new lan
Hi Stephanie,
On Sat, Dec 30 2017 at 04:55:18 AM, Stephanie Björk
wrote:
[...]
> I would love to maintain Groff after I finish university, which should
> be in 10 years' time because I'm still in high school.
After university with a full-time job you will have much less free time
(I wish I were
On Sat, Dec 30 2017 at 01:35:22 AM, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
[...]
> There are just technical issues, AFAIK: Bertrand didn't have write
> access to the GNU upload area. Hopefully, this is fixed now, and I
> guess that he will do a release as soon time permits.
I still don't have upload rights on GN
在 2017年12月30日星期六 CST 上午5:55:18，Stephanie Björk 写道：
> I think part of the reason why the release for Groff has been so slow and
> sparse could be because of two things: the patches aren't ``significant''
> enough for some degree of ``significant,'' there are not enough maintainers
> and thus not eno
> I think part of the reason why the release for Groff has been so
> slow and sparse could be because of two things: the patches aren't
> ``significant'' enough for some degree of ``significant,'' there are
> not enough maintainers and thus not enough motivation to publicly
> release or effect any
I think part of the reason why the release for Groff has been so slow and
sparse could be because of two things: the patches aren't ``significant''
enough for some degree of ``significant,'' there are not enough maintainers
and thus not enough motivation to publicly release or effect anything, this
[cc-me please]
在 2017年11月21日星期二 CST 下午7:49:51，Blake McBride 写道：
> Agreed. This also maximizes the chances the distros will pick up the
> latest version.
>
> On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 1:17 AM, Boyuan Yang <073p...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > [cc-me please, I'm not on list]
> >
> > Hello all,
> >
> > I
Agreed. This also maximizes the chances the distros will pick up the
latest version.
On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 1:17 AM, Boyuan Yang <073p...@gmail.com> wrote:
> [cc-me please, I'm not on list]
>
> Hello all,
>
> I found a typo on the Wiki page of Groff under directory.fsf.org. On the
> page
> [1],
[cc-me please, I'm not on list]
Hello all,
I found a typo on the Wiki page of Groff under directory.fsf.org. On the page
[1], the latest version number is "1.23", not 1.22.3. I think it is a typo and
can be fixed easily.
Besides, I have a question about the release plan of future groff (e.g.,
16 matches
Mail list logo
