[self-follow-up] At 2023-03-25T03:04:32-0500, G. Branden Robinson wrote: > 2. Should we test more characters? We could have an `if` request for > each one of interest, but that would rapidly become lengthy. We > might consider an extension to the 'c' conditional expression > predicate such that it will test each ordinary or special character > in its argument in turn, returning true only if _all_ characters are > resolvable. This would make checking a large set of glyphs less > garrulous. (At present, it simply ignores all characters after the > first, while still recognizing special character escape sequence > syntax.)
I need to correct that last statement; adding characters to a 'c' conditional expression predicate causes the test to fail, always. $ groff -z .if c ab .tm a and b are defined .if c a .tm a is defined a is defined .if c \[-] .tm minus is defined minus is defined .if c \[-]a .tm minus and a are defined Regards, Branden
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
