Hi, Dave Kemper wrote on Tue, Aug 04, 2020 at 08:17:25PM -0500: > On 7/31/20, Peter Schaffter <pe...@schaffter.ca> wrote:
>> Several years ago, I fielded the idea that, instead of chasing after >> the Grail of paragraph-at-once, groff's line-formatting algorithm be >> improved instead. I worked on systems that used the formatting >> strategy I proposed >> >> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/groff/2014-03/msg00322.html >> >> and can confirm that it significantly reduced the amount of >> intervention required to achieve good grey on a line-by-line basis. >> There wasn't much interest in the proposal back then--I felt a bit >> like a voice crying in the wilderness--but maybe it's time to try >> crying again? > I wonder if it's less a lack of interest and more a recognition that > we have a shortage of people with the willingness and expertise to > make any substantive changes to the groff code. I, and I'm sure > others, welcome any improvements to typographic output, but it's hard > to get excited over ideas -- even good ideas -- if no one plans to > turn them into working code. That situation hasn't changed much since > 2014. Exactly. When you post an idea and five people reply with ten arguments why it is unlikely to work, it was often a bad idea. But if you get no reply, it may still be an excellent idea. For example, i often drop out of discussions, even interesting discussions, when i don't plan to do the work, or even don't join them in the first place in that case. Yours, Ingo
