On 5/6/23, G. Branden Robinson wrote:
> I disagree with this too. Part of the value of encapsulation of the
> fundamental character type inside a formatter-specific type is that we
> can change our minds _again_ if circumstances warrant.
Good point, and that moots all my points in this email. N
At 2023-04-29T22:33:52-0500, Dave Kemper wrote:
> On 4/26/23, G. Branden Robinson wrote:
> > It would probably be a good idea to represent Unicode strings
> > internally using char32_t as a base type anyway, but groff's design
> > under the Unix filter model described above makes the choice less
>
