Hello all,
Perl is full of things that groff doesn't like. How would you include
a Perl routine in a groff document?
Backslashing all the way until the text is absolutely unrecognizable,
or would you tell groff somehow
that plse, forget about special characters and leave this thing as it
i
> forget about special characters and leave this thing as it is,
> for a while?
.eo
.ec
On 21-Nov-08 08:32:46, Tadziu Hoffmann wrote:
>
>> forget about special characters and leave this thing as it is,
>> for a while?
>
> .eo
> .ec
Provided no "in-code" escapes or macros (e.g. to embolden or format
a particular segment of Perl code) will be needed, Tadziu's solution
will be simple
Tadziu & Ted, thank you very much for the quick reply.
First I tried Tadziu's suggestion with a simple file containing
nothing but a short segment
of a Perl routine. It worked beautifully.
However, when I applied it with the same segment in context, it gave
me warnings.
Then I tried the sa
Hi Miklos,
> Perl is full of things that groff doesn't like. How would you include
> a Perl routine in a groff document?
Others have provided an answer to your question but it did remind me
once again that if something like GNU Source-highlight grew a troff
backend to accompany its existing HTM
Yes, I agree. I wouldn't argue against the global (or "from here on out") kind
of switch. However, a local switch that lasts only until the end of the
current graf helps one use .am to easily modify [EMAIL PROTECTED] and [EMAIL
PROTECTED] to use a special colour just for header text. Without
> However, I would agree that for consistency of logic in ms macros,
> changes in colour would be local to the paragraph and revert to the
> default at a new paragraph; and there would be a register (analogous
> to \n[PS]) to make a global change.
Patch, please :-)
Werner
