Re: [Groff] Correct protocol for making changes

[Werner LEMBERG]

> I'm wondering, though, if it might make more sense to use:
>
>       .ds eL \&.\|.\|.\&

This would be the right definition for a string.

> Whether the .ds is worth the trouble depends on how many times you
> use the ellipsis in a file versus the need to remember another
> string definition.  By hand coding, I have absolute control over the
> result and can see what will happen by looking at the inline
> sequence.  I also don't have to think about or remember the leading
> \| or \& in the string definition.

Well, having a string definition for the ellipsis has two advantages

  . the user doesn't have to fiddle around with the surrounding \& --
    I see far too much man pages which have such unprotected full
    stops, causing groff to insert two spaces instead of a single one

  . the definition could be overridden (for example, with a real
    `ellipsis' glyph)


      Werner