Re: [Groff] Questions about groff

[Bernd Warken]

On Sat, May 04, 2002 at 03:02:44AM -0400, Chuck Martin wrote:
>   2. What is the difference between groff and TeX/LaTeX?

Documents written with roff are easier to be understood because 
the separation of arguments in TeX macros is quite dubious.
The groff language extensions for macro programming allow to 
comfortably define your own markup-like structures in every groff
document.

> What about the mm, ms, and me macros?

These are similar in functionality, it's just a matter of taste which 
one you prefer.  All of them provide features for having very large 
documents such as books.  Many macro names in `mm' resemble the ones
used in the `man' macro set.

>         * Writing letters.  We don't do many letters, but it would be
>           nice, and I would think that this is probably one of the
>           more common uses for groff.

It is very easy to write good-looking letters with plain groff.
But it would be a good idea to have a simple letter macro set, maybe
based on the `man' macro set.  This could be an entry for the groff
TODO file.

> ... how difficult would it be to create my own macros?
>  Where can I find documentation on how to create macros?

For writine troff macros in the classical style, see Kernighan's
"TROFF/NROFF User Manual" http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/cs/54.ps.
Some general rules are also stated in the man page groff_tmac(5).
The groff info file is the main reference.

With the .eo and .ec extensions provided by groff, it is possible 
to define most of your own macros without the infamous backslash
doubling.  Have a look at the source code for roff(7) of the actual
groff version for examples on how to do this.

Is there a need for more documentation on groff macro programming?

Bernd Warken