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.
