Re: [Groff] Suggested patch to post-html.cpp

[Steffen Nurpmeso]

Hello Robert,

Robert Bocchino <address@hidden> wrote:
 |On Sep 21, 2014, at 2:25 PM, Bertrand Garrigues <bertrand.\
 |address@hidden> wrote:
 |> I am not qualified to review your patch because I haven't studied
 |> grohtml's code, but I've tested it on the few .html files that are built
 |> by default in the 'doc' directory from pic.ms and webpage.ms, there are
 |> a few .html pages impacted but the result is unchanged, I haven't seen
 |> any regression.

I have your message also in my queue but it will take quite some
time until i will be able to use your test.
..I agree with Betrand: it would be better to understand the code
paths as such.

 |Thanks, Bertrand.
 |
 |I'm thinking it might be a good idea to start developing a \
 |test suite for grohtml.  That would (1) document what grohtml \
 |is supposed to do, including identifying current known bugs, \
 |and (2) provide a systematic way to verify that patches are \
 |working as intended.
 |
 |Does the list agree?  If so, I am happy to volunteer to work on this.

I personally would be happy if there would be input <=> expected
output tests available that could be driven by make(1) / sh(1)
/ awk(1).
But having input <=> expected output datasets available at all
would be just plain fantastic, especially if under GPL2 or ISC or
another really free license!
Ciao,

--steffen