In article <20191224113037.gl24...@pony.stderr.spb.ru>, Valery Ushakov <u...@stderr.spb.ru> wrote: >On Tue, Dec 24, 2019 at 08:46:49 +0700, Robert Elz wrote: > >> Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2019 23:45:34 +0100 >> From: Steffen Nurpmeso <stef...@sdaoden.eu> >> Message-ID: <20191223224534.8ufgy%stef...@sdaoden.eu> >> >> >> | |Troff reads .ie and checks the condition. The condition is true and >> | |so the rest of the line is executed. Then troff reads .el that >> | |matches successful .ie, so the .el is discarded. >> | | >> | |Then it reads .el which is not matched with any .ie that troff has >> | |seen. It's usually silently discarded, >> >> That is what is (always was) intended to happen. > >Sure. > > >> | |but since we run with -ww we >> | |get the warning about an unbalanced .el >> >> That's a broken warning. > >Amen. But let's be honest, in this day and age *very* few people can >can read troff, never mind write it (and I don't count myself as one), >so a warning from groff, however broken, will just confuse and upset >the users. Since silencing this warning doesn't require that much of >an effort and doesn't mutilate the code that much, it's easier to just >shut it up.
We should file a bug report with groff though (and optionally supply a fix). christos
