[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Groff] Choosing a portability target
From: |
Eric S. Raymond |
Subject: |
Re: [Groff] Choosing a portability target |
Date: |
Fri, 12 Jan 2007 18:01:53 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.4.2.2i |
Werner LEMBERG <address@hidden>:
> ??? Things like \[rs] will definitely fail in classical troff
> implementations. So what do you mean with `traditional mode'?
I should have said I'm testing to be sure that they work in the
default mode, rather than needing compatibility mode to be forced off.
> What accuracy problems in groff_diff have you encountered?
Still investigating. I may be wrong, or I may be misunderstanding
what's there. I'll report back in detail when my conclusions are
firmer. But I think that some escapes that are only documented to
work in compatibility mode also work in groff native mode.
--
<a href="http://www.catb.org/~esr/">Eric S. Raymond</a>
- Re: [Groff] Choosing a portability target, (continued)
- Re: [Groff] Choosing a portability target, Werner LEMBERG, 2007/01/12
- Re: [Groff] Choosing a portability target, Eric S. Raymond, 2007/01/12
- Re: [Groff] Choosing a portability target, Werner LEMBERG, 2007/01/12
- Re: [Groff] Choosing a portability target, Gunnar Ritter, 2007/01/12
- Re: [Groff] Choosing a portability target, Werner LEMBERG, 2007/01/12
- Re: [Groff] Choosing a portability target, Eric S. Raymond, 2007/01/12
- Re: [Groff] Choosing a portability target, Werner LEMBERG, 2007/01/12
- Re: [Groff] Choosing a portability target,
Eric S. Raymond <=
Re: [Groff] Choosing a portability target, Larry Kollar, 2007/01/10
Re: [Groff] Choosing a portability target, Werner LEMBERG, 2007/01/12