> > If you don't agree with these mappings, you could use the
> > .tr request to change that, for example
> >
> > .tr `'
> >
> > so that `foo' in input becomes 'foo' in output.
> > Alternatively, you might use the .char request like this:
> >
> > .char ` \N'96'
>
> Yeah, I think that's wha
> > Personally, I would prefer that quotes render sensibly in
> > utf8, html and dvi, and that correctly written man pages do
> > not need any modification. Also, the use of `foo' is very
> > convenient (even if it no longer appears balanced in the
> > source).
I agree. In case of doubt, stick
> > Since any code extracts, C, shell, etc., often already need
> > manipulation, perhaps because they contain the escape
> > character, it's these that should use \` and \', e.g.
> >
> > $ grep \'foo\\.bar\' \`find -name \'xxx.*\'\`
>
> Agreed -- except that \' won't work -- you need \(aq,
On Sun, Jun 15, 2008 at 06:50:59PM +0200, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
> Mhmm. Personally, I prefer `foo' to 'foo' even if looks ugly with
> most fonts.
Hmm -- I can see that it has a small advantage, but even so...
I don't really mind whether groff uses `foo' or 'foo' when rendering for
ascii/latin1/
On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 8:52 AM, Werner LEMBERG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Personally, I would prefer that quotes render sensibly in utf8, html
>> and dvi, and that correctly written man pages do not need any
>> modification. Also, the use of `foo' is very convenient (even if it
>> no longer
just a notice,
several years ago (1987 ?) a problem with theses backtics where noticed and
$( .. ) was introduced to replace them. before you start to replace every
backtic it may more resonable to replace it with $( .. )
re,
wh
Michael Kerrisk wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 8:52 AM, Werner
> several years ago (1987 ?) a problem with theses backtics where
> noticed and $( .. ) was introduced to replace them. before you start
> to replace every backtic it may more resonable to replace it with $(
> .. )
But this is not relevant to the general problem of providing good
representations
Werner LEMBERG wrote:
>> several years ago (1987 ?) a problem with theses backtics where
>> noticed and $( .. ) was introduced to replace them. before you start
>> to replace every backtic it may more resonable to replace it with $(
>> .. )
>
> But this is not relevant to the general problem of
> Also, there are still fonts in which ASCII 0x27 and 0x60 are
> symmetric (you can also create your own (or remap an existing one)
> if necessary) which are still useful and convenient for programmers.
Indeed. Right now I'm using such a font in Emacs, a 12x24 bitmap font
(Etl-Fixed-Medium).
>
> > Also, there are still fonts in which ASCII 0x27 and 0x60
> > are symmetric (you can also create your own (or remap an
> > existing one) if necessary) which are still useful and
> > convenient for programmers.
>
> Indeed. Right now I'm using such a font in Emacs, a 12x24
> bitmap font (Etl-Fi
> > . Depending on the output device, ` and ' should be mapped to
> > different characters. However, \` and \' should always map to
> > ASCII 0x60 and ASCII 0x27 for proper cut and paste support.
> >
> > Do you all agree with this?
>
> Yes, except that \' now maps to latin1/utf-8/etc ยด
> > Indeed. Right now I'm using such a font in Emacs, a 12x24 bitmap
> > font (Etl-Fixed-Medium).
>
> I'm using my own 6x10 bitmap font, hand-drawn pixel by pixel
> in long hours of hard manual labor ;-). [6x10 means that
> you can display *lots* of text on a 1920x1200 display.]
Uh, oh, I *hate
> Isn't it possible in the UTF-8 device to create a (pseudo-)
> font with ASCII encoding?
I don't understand. Please rephrase.
Werner
13 matches
Mail list logo
