At 2020-11-15T14:13:38+0000, Dorai Sitaram via wrote: > UTP strongly hints that the -ms macros have the end-of-input trap .em > pre-set to a defined macro called .EM, with the implication that if > the user wants to affect end-of-input behavior they can append or > prepend to this macro rather than messing with .em directly. However > groff's s.tmac sets its .em value to a macro of another name (viz., > .pg@end-text). > > This is probably one place where one can safely bring back > compatibility to earlier times. It is not necessary to give up > .pg@end-text: .EM could either expand to or be an alias to > .pg@end-text. I can't think of any modernizing rationale for groff > to give up this convention. FWIW, both Heirloom and neatroff keep the > .EM.
It seems like a reasonable enough idea; would you file it as a New Feaature item on Savannah? https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?group=groff Regards, Branden
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
