> - It's all a single identifier, so breaking it into multiple
> lines to avoid using \f would hurt readability.
I think it's a matter of debate whether
.RB [ U ] INT \fIN\fP _WIDTH
or
.RB [ U ] INT\c
.IB N _WIDTH
is more readable. In the latter at least it's obvious
in which typeface each part will be set.
> but for some reason the underscore (_) is also set in italics
> (well, under-underscored, since italics is just a big hype :).
How can you tell?
If you're using devps:
in the Adobe fonts Times-Roman, Times-Italic, and Times-Bold
the underscore is identical, so you don't see which underscore
is being used (but it's the bold underscore).
If you're using devtty:
If GROFF_NO_SGR is unset:
the output is correct, the underscore is in bold.
If GROFF_NO_SGR is set (and you're piping into less):
Both bold underscore and underlined underscore are output as
<underscore><backspace><underscore>. less has a preference
for interpreting this as an "italic" underscore rather than
as a bold underscore. There's nothing you can do short of
modifying less.
