Re: [Groff] broken interaction between line numbering and diversions

[Dave Kemper]

On 9/17/14, Tadziu Hoffmann <address@hidden> wrote:
> I think you're using the diversion wrong.

This is, admittedly, an artificial example cooked up to illustrate the
behavior.  This is clearly a situation where a diversion, or even a
macro, would be unnecessary at all.

The question I'm posing is whether a user who uses a diversion in this
"wrong" (or, let's say, less than optimal) manner should see output
that is so clearly not what was intended, or whether the software
should do something intelligent with the user's suboptimal input,
producing output that is probably what the user wanted.

Modern software tends to choose the latter route.  Groff is not modern
software.  But should it make some concessions to the fact that it's
still around in 2014?