Re: [Groff] nop request

[Ralph Corderoy]

Hi,

> >     int main(int argc, char **argv[])
> >     {
> >         printf("hello world!\\n");
> >     }
> > 
> > I much prefer `**' instead of a single `*' for dereferencing versus
> > multiplication.  And a single backslash just doesn't stand out, hence
> > `\\n' for the escape.
> > 
> > Of course, it jars a bit when others come to read it because it looks
> > like C but isn't quite and any edits they make are often wrong
> > initially.  But I've got used to it and like it.
> 
> To be honest: This is weird :-)  I've never seen that before.  But I
> begin to understand why you like doubled backslashes...

To be honest, I was lying.  :-)  If I hadn't made this strange style up
on the spot and instead really did use it then I'd probably be arguing
now that it helps make code much more readable.  As long as you don't
read normal C easily.  :-)

> > Yes, abnormal.
> 
> I suggest to stop arguing about normality...

Sure, the argument's over.

> > I'm not proposing disallowing it.  I'm saying that people that know
> > enough to do this can probably cope with tmac.trace assuming it is
> > still backslash.
> 
> Sorry, I don't understand what you want to say.  tmac.trace will fail
> if the backslash character (for whatever reasons) is not the escape
> character.  And there is no way to fix that without additional
> commands.

Yes, but a knowledgable user who's changing escape character will also
be capable of finding some way of using tmac.trace or a modified copy
of it.

> > Do you not think that convention is also a strong aid in
> > comprehending others code?
> 
> Code is more than backslashes, isn't it?

Yes, but you're breaking the *normal* style which makes it harder for
others to read.  Your argument that it is easier to read would only be
true if it was the dawn of time and you were creating it without others
already being used to the existing format.  You aren't in that
position.

> > The interface of mdoc isn't at issue; when the documentation is
> > insufficient a lot of troff people will look at the macro code for
> > the answer.  What can be a hard task will be made more difficult by
> > having to follow your abnormal style.
> 
> I'll improve the documentation of mdoc also...

Never sufficiently.  The source will also be inspected to answer a
question that the documentation doesn't cover.  Although improved
documentation is always good.

I suggest we let this drop.  You prefer your new format and will defend
it simply because you wish to use it.  I'll argue that that might be OK
for you as the author but not for other readers of the code.  We could
agree to disagree ;-)


Ralph.