Bjarni,
Nice, tight analysis and proposed solutions. Thank you.
Mike Bianchi
On Thu, Apr 02, 2020 at 11:58:01PM +0000, Bjarni Ingi Gislason wrote:
snip
> 1) The missing part is information.
> Solution:
> a) Provide a message (warning, error), if "\snn" is in the input.
> b) Augment the documentation to tell the readers,
> that "\snn" is deprecated, obsolete, out of date, etc.
> and what they should use instead.
>
> 2) About the "\snn" problem.
> The current executing code is not the problem.
> The current existing roff-files are not the problem.
> The problem is the people who (still, will) write "\snn"
> instead of "\s(nn" (portability) or "\s[nn]" (for "groff" and
> compatibles).
snip
> 3) Other things.
> a) A missing part of messages is the name of the culprit,
> in this case the s-escape (\s).
> Solution: Provide the name ("\\s escape" is already used once in the
> subroutine).
> b) Adding details of the argument of the escape in messages is not
> necessary.
> c) Adding specific code to report specific syntax errors is not
> necessary.
snip
