Hi Doug,
> Originally \(pl and \(mi came from a fixed font (S) while + and \-
> came from the current font.
That matches CSTR 54 which has
\-Minus sign in the current font
in the table near the beginning and \(pl and \(mi as `Special Character
Names' on the last page.
> As I understand
Hi,
Ingo wrote:
> Given that the man(7) .TP .itc hack got committed to groff
...
> Of course, i still don't recommend actually using it, because that
> would make your manual page misrender on groff <= 1.22.3, on mandoc <=
> 1.14.1, and on any version of anything else.
This is sad news. It's an
At 2017-05-02T21:29:39-0400, Doug McIlroy wrote:
> I was previously told that \(mi is the true minus sign. But the
> true minus sign, at least in my mind, must come from the current
> font, so that it comes out right wherever it occurs, even in a
> bold headline like "Fairbanks shivers at -50".
I
Hi Branden,
> A quick experiment with -Z shows me that groff does still today load
> the S [special] font when the \(pl and \(mi character escapes are
> used.
Yes, my list email from earlier today lists the PostScript glyphs:
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/groff/2017-05/msg00028.html
> It's
Folk,
I've been sort of watching from the sidelines here, but am going to toss in my
2 cents.
First, I once heard troff/groff described as the assembly language of type
setting. So to my mind it should be "simple" (as in not too complicated) and
stable. The first goal is forever lost.
Stable
Hi Mike,
> Stable, to me, implies not changing much over time, and most changes
> should be backward compatible.
...
> Backward compatible means that all code written to the existing
> definitions should turn out the same results as in the past when
> submitted to new assemblers. (I have nroff do
Mike Bianchi wrote:
I absolutely and completely support this opinion of yours.
Maybe except that it would be nice if some future user could
easily find some documentation and now what to do to get "nice"r
looking output, maybe with some command line argument (variable),
or a configuration file,
> "G. Branden Robinson" hat am 3. Mai 2017 um
> 01:02 geschrieben:
>
> The .itc request is a groff extension so an additional layer of
>
> .ie \(.g
>
> could be added.
Where do you want to add this--in the macro package? This would not be
necessary, since it is already groff's own package.
At 2017-05-03T17:24:41+0200, Carsten Kunze wrote:
> > "G. Branden Robinson" hat am 3. Mai 2017 um
> > 01:02 geschrieben:
> >
> > The .itc request is a groff extension so an additional layer of
> >
> > .ie \(.g
> >
> > could be added.
>
> Where do you want to add this--in the macro package?
N
>
> For that to paste from a man page, viewed as UTF-8 TTY,
Erm, I may be missing something, here... but if monospaced hyphens and
minus signs are optically indistinguishable, what's the worth in
differentiating between either?
IMHO, if any change is to be made, it should be with grotty's handli
On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 03:51:24PM +0100, Ralph Corderoy wrote:
> :
> :
> - A hyphen for text, e.g. beer-flavoured ice-cream.
> :
> > To my mind - in groff should always default to the ASCII, 7-bit,
> > undistinguished character.
>
> But it's always meant hyphen in
> "G. Branden Robinson" hat am 3. Mai 2017 um
> 17:30 geschrieben:
>
> Nope. By "private macro" I mean one defined and used only within one
> document.
A manpage is "one document". Or what do you refer to?
> Most \n(.g tests I've seen in man pages are to try to _achieve_
> portability, not br
> Carsten Kunze hat am 3. Mai 2017 um 21:37
> geschrieben:
>
> > E.g., ncurses uses these conditionals in many of its pages:
> >
> > .ie \n(.g .ds `` \(lq
> > .el .ds `` ``
> > .ie \n(.g .ds '' \(rq
> > .el .ds '' ''
I overlooked the word ncurses...
Ok, there had been days when th
Is there literally no way to identify when a modern (non-GNU) troff is
being used?
On 4 May 2017 at 05:46, Carsten Kunze wrote:
> > Carsten Kunze hat am 3. Mai 2017 um 21:37
> geschrieben:
> >
> > > E.g., ncurses uses these conditionals in many of its pages:
> > >
> > > .ie \n(.g .ds `` \(lq
>
> John Gardner hat am 3. Mai 2017 um 21:55 geschrieben:
>
>
> Is there literally no way to identify when a modern (non-GNU) troff is
> being used?
General typesetting is something else. Heirloom has this kludge only for
manpages, neatroff (AFAIK not used for manpages) likely does not set .g.
> "G. Branden Robinson" hat am 3. Mai 2017 um
> 22:47 geschrieben:
>
> So ncurses should be gating on the definition of the glyph rather than
> on whether groff is the typesetter, right?
>
> .ie c \(lq .ds `` \(lq
> .el.ds `` ``
> .ie c \(rq .ds '' \(rq
> .el.ds '' ''
>
> What
Hi,
Carsten Kunze Heirloom wrote on Wed, May 03, 2017 at 09:37:21PM +0200:
> I assume also mandoc(1) reads \(.g as 1.
Yes:
$ echo '\\n(.g' | mandoc | sed -n 5p
1
$ less /co/mdocml/roff.c
int
roff_getreg(const struct roff *r, const char *name)
{
int val;
if ('.' == name[0]
Hi Branden,
> .ie c \(lq .ds `` \(lq
> .el.ds `` ``
> .ie c \(rq .ds '' \(rq
> .el.ds '' ''
>
> What do you think?
If doesn't work:
$ uname -a
SunOS unstable11s 5.11 11.2 sun4u sparc SUNW,SPARC-Enterprise
$ cat tmp.roff
.ie c \(lq .ds `` \(lq
.el.ds `` ``
.ie c \(rq .d
On Wed, 3 May 2017 22:06:10 +0200 (CEST)
Carsten Kunze wrote:
> There are ways to detect the formatter but a manpage must not do
> this.
Why not? ISTM we'd have better manpages if they weren't constrained to
the rendering capability of a VT-100 terminal. For example, equations
or pictures c
On Wed, 3 May 2017 13:42:55 -0400
Mike Bianchi wrote:
> The - character exists on all keyboards. It is not labeled minus
> or hyphen or endash. It generates the decimal 45 (hex 0x2D, octal
> 055) character. That any *roff processor would give it a different
> meaning is most unfortunate.
IMO
At 2017-05-04T01:04:48+0200, Ingo Schwarze wrote:
> Hi Branden,
>
> > .ie c \(lq .ds `` \(lq
> > .el.ds `` ``
> > .ie c \(rq .ds '' \(rq
> > .el.ds '' ''
> >
> > What do you think?
>
> If doesn't work:
>
> $ uname -a
> SunOS unstable11s 5.11 11.2 sun4u sparc SUNW,SPARC-Enterpri
At 2017-05-03T20:13:29-0400, James K. Lowden wrote:
> On Wed, 3 May 2017 22:06:10 +0200 (CEST)
> Carsten Kunze wrote:
>
> > There are ways to detect the formatter but a manpage must not do
> > this.
>
> Why not? ISTM we'd have better manpages if they weren't constrained
> to the rendering cap
Hi Ralph,
Ralph Corderoy wrote on Wed, May 03, 2017 at 03:51:24PM +0100:
> - A hyphen for text, e.g. beer-flavoured ice-cream.
> \- A minus sign in the current font.
> \(miA minus sign in the special font.
> \(hyAnother name for plain `-', so a hyphen for text.
Hi Branden,
G. Branden Robinson wrote on Wed, May 03, 2017 at 08:52:42PM -0400:
> Why do my man pages need to be more portable the shell scripts
> or C code I ship with them?
They need not, but i would consider aiming for about the same level
of portability reasonable. Meaning, that they work o
Hi James,
James K. Lowden wrote on Wed, May 03, 2017 at 08:13:18PM -0400:
> IIUC, this debate about how to render - and \- stems from a conflict in
> historical practice. Is the following correct?
>
> When troff was young, terminals were ascii and the - character
> was 0x2d. Manpage gu
25 matches
Mail list logo
