[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
pic: solid vs filled shapes
From: |
Dave Kemper |
Subject: |
pic: solid vs filled shapes |
Date: |
Sun, 06 Jun 2021 08:22:00 -0500 |
Hi all, I'm trying to understand some basic pic behavior.
I'm starting with this input; let's call it "picfile":
.PS
box;
.PE
Then "groff -p picfile" produces a simple unfilled rectangle (that is, just the
outline).
According to section 6.9 of "Making Pictures With GNU PIC" (doc/pic.ms), there
are two ways to turn this into a filled box: put a "fill 1" or a "solid" after
the "box". The first of these works, producing a solid black rectangle:
$ sed 's/box/box fill 1/' picfile | groff -p
But the second does not; it produces the same output as the unadorned "box":
$ diff <(sed 's/box/box solid/' picfile | pic) <(cat picfile | pic) | wc
0 0 0
I know that pic recognizes the word "solid," because changing it to something
else produces a syntax error:
$ sed 's/box/box stolid/' picfile | pic > /dev/null
pic:<standard input>:2: there is no variable 'stolid'
pic:<standard input>:2: giving up on this picture
But the "solid" modifier has no effect on the drawn box.
Am I doing something wrong? Is pic?
- pic: solid vs filled shapes,
Dave Kemper <=