On 7/10/21, G. Branden Robinson <g.branden.robin...@gmail.com> wrote: > I think Ossanna implemented what was practical and easy without worrying > too much about how the functionality would have to be rationalized if > explained to someone without access to the source code.
Sure, and Ossanna worked under constraints of performance and memory unthinkable to us today. I don't begrudge him his shortcuts. But, as I understand it, James Clark wrote groff without reference to any previous source code. So when some nonintuitive behavior gets enshrined into groff, we can probably assume it's intentional -- even if its only intention is mirroring historical behavior. > The behavior of this operator is so specialized that I despair of > coming up with a better name for it. Well, the operator has gotten along without a name for a few decades now and can probably continue to do so, even if it makes the introductory sentences to emails about it a little long-winded. More important is describing its behavior accurately.
