[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Groff] OT: \} considered as macro argument regarding register .$
From: |
Ralph Corderoy |
Subject: |
Re: [Groff] OT: \} considered as macro argument regarding register .$ |
Date: |
Sat, 05 Jul 2014 16:54:16 +0100 |
Hi Carsten,
> It could unfortunately be off topic in case it is not a groff issue.
I think the list is also OK for discussing troff, especially historical
behaviour.
> Heriloom and Plan 9 have the same behavior. So it could even be
> possible that this has also been the case when these conditional
> blocks had been introduced (roff? 1st nroff?).
I can't spot anything to avoid \n($. counting \} from browsing the 7th
Ed. source. Note, 7th Ed. has been ported to x86 and can be run as a VM
if you want to test it. http://www.nordier.com/v7x86/
BTW, as well as \n(.$ including \} in its count, it naturally follows
that \$3, for example, is \}.
> But in my opinion it should not be "fixed" if it is the traditional
> nroff behavior.
Agreed. But documented to avoid surprises. I checked CSTR 54 and
couldn't find anything covering this.
Cheers, Ralph.