Hello alls,
For my last mail about Utmac, it appears that all I wanted to say
can be summarized in a few lines:
- Utmac comes with two files – u-en and u-fr – which are used
to localize strings and typographic details.
- Utmac populates the internal pdf table of contents, and
creates
Stephanie Björk wrote:
> The project is here: https://github.com/katt64/troff-lists (bul.tmac is the
> beating heart of it all)
I had a look, and it is very well done. Thank you for sharing it!
I also tested it with heirloom troff, and it seems to work flawlessly.
May I suggest you to choose a
Thank you, Pierre-Jean.
It's amazing that it works in another implementation of Troff that I
haven't really touched yet.
Since you told me about Heirloom Troff, I went and see its user's manual
and found that \n(.g is usually 0, isn't it? So, that meant that my macros
would artificially restrict
On Tue, 05 Dec 2017 09:30:37 +0100
Pierre-Jean wrote:
> It is very unlikely people use Utmac as is, but I believe its existence makes
> sense nonetheless as a proof of concept: Troff can fulfill 21th century
> needs.
I just wonder how Troff/Heirloom does compare with Mom package when it comes to
My -markup package has has fully parametrized lists (enumerated and
itemised) and a stack. The stack means that lists, fonts, displays etc
are nestable. Lists were the hardest, and it took me long time before I
could devise a good way of doing them. The package (not quite the
latest version) is in
Having seen briefly the `tmac/` directory, I have to say that I'm impressed
by your work as well. I do hope it is still being maintained.
It's good to see that much of Groff's specific stuffs are being used, as my
macros seem to be ridden with old habits from AT&T Troff. :)
On Tue, Dec 5, 2017 a
Hello Gour,
Gour wrote:
> I just wonder how Troff/Heirloom does compare with Mom package when it comes
> to
> quality typesetting (aka 21th century needs)?
Mom is a macro set, while Troff/Heirloom is the interpreter of the
macro set, so, we can't compare things like this.
A proper comparision
On Tue, 05 Dec 2017 17:54:02 +0100
Pierre-Jean wrote:
> Mom is a macro set, while Troff/Heirloom is the interpreter of the
> macro set, so, we can't compare things like this.
I stand corrected for not being explicit enough.
> A proper comparision would be between Groff, Heirloom Troff, and
> Ne
On Tue, Dec 05, 2017, Stephanie Björk wrote:
> as my macros really use weird, fancy stuff.
I don't see anything weird or fancy that hasn't been a part of groff
for at least fifteen years. To what are you referring? I'm
intrigued.
--
Peter Schaffter
http://www.schaffter.ca
On Tue, Dec 05, 2017, Pierre-Jean wrote:
> 2) With some hacks if not out of the box, Mom probably works well
> enough on Neatroff to take advantage of its features.
I suspect not. I haven't got the time to look into it, but if
anyone wants to test mom with Neatroof, it could be instructive.
> 3)
10 matches
Mail list logo
