Re: Differences in `ne` and `bp` line-breaking behavior

[Tadziu Hoffmann]

> > I have discovered recently that `ne` and `bp` behave differently in
> > regards to pending input lines. `bp` breaks such lines, while `ne`
> > does not. In practice this means that `ne` does not behave like a
> > conditional `bp` as one would reasonably expect.
> 
> I invented .ne 55 years ago and have never heard a complaint about its
> design before. It is not a conditional .bp, because that would case a
> line break, which .ne never does, nor should.

Also, .ne need not have to do with page breaks.  It tests whether
the required amount of space is available *before the next trap*,
but that trap doesn't have to be an end-of-page trap.  It could
be any trap set up for a specific purpose, in particular also
a diversion trap.