> Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2014 19:47:19 +0100 (CET)
> Cc: groff@gnu.org
> From: Werner LEMBERG
>
> >> Sorry for the delayed answer. Your patch looks fine, and I'm going
> >> to apply it soon. Thanks a lot.
> >
> > Great, thanks. Now I can publish the binary with that patch and
> > claim that it was
> Out of curiosity, why did you prefer this:
>
> +#if defined(__MSDOS__) || (defined(_WIN32) && !defined(__CYGWIN__))
> +void normalize_for_lf (string &fn)
> +{
> + int fnlen = fn.length();
> + for (int i = 0; i < fnlen; i++) {
> +if (fn[i] == '\\')
> + fn[i] = '/';
> +
> Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2014 11:47:12 +0100 (CET)
> Cc: groff@gnu.org
> From: Werner LEMBERG
>
> With your version, I get a warning about an unused variable `fn' if
> not compiling for MS.
Got it, thanks.
On 22/11/14 10:47, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
>
>> Out of curiosity, why did you prefer this:
>>
>> +#if defined(__MSDOS__) || (defined(_WIN32) && !defined(__CYGWIN__))
>> +void normalize_for_lf (string &fn)
>> +{
>> + int fnlen = fn.length();
>> + for (int i = 0; i < fnlen; i++) {
>> +
Hi Carsten,
> (It was unfair to put the .ds after .if !\w and .if d ... :-)
I didn't write it; it's real code from groff's distributed macros. :-)
> > Whitespace aids grokking expressions.
>
> Are whitespace not already allowed in groff?
Only if the whole expression is surrounded by paren
Hi Ralph,
> > (It was unfair to put the .ds after .if !\w and .if d ... :-)
>
> I didn't write it; it's real code from groff's distributed macros. :-)
I meant that there was the condition *and* the conditional statement on the
same line which has made this example looking more complicated tha
Ingo Schwarze wrote:
|Steffen Nurpmeso wrote on Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 11:45:04AM +0100:
|> Ingo Schwarze wrote:
|>> Steffen Nurpmeso wrote on Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 06:09:08PM +0100:
|
|>>> For S-roff i will add a .substr request which takes an index and
|
|>> Please don't. That is completel
Ralph Corderoy wrote:
|I'm interested in better expressions, string and numeric. It's poor
|string expressions that got us into this via 'c'a'b'c'd'e'.
I'm wondering a bit since your current interim and part-time
favorite Python supports ask-me-the-name-for-it sequences:
elif o in ('-
