A version of an index macro is in the file
"contrib/hdtbl/hdmisc.tmac-u",
or "/usr/share/groff/1.22.4/tmac/hdmisc.tmac".
Its name is "t*index".
It needs a correction, see for example groff bug #54538.
--
Bjarni I. Gislason
>
> but I guess that's an indication I'm thinking about things in the wrong
> way.
Possibly. What exactly have you been using `.index` for?
By the way, is it a goal of groff to support the Heirloom Troff extensions?
Nope, more like the other way around. Groff is the dominant Troff
implementati
"Denis M. Wilson" wrote:
> To implement .index as a macro one could consider using .substring
> together with the Knuth-Morris-Pratt algorithm. I've done simpler
> things eg the equivalent of The C library substr().
Thank you. Would you be willing to share your strstr() macro?
I'm surprised nob
On 7/25/20, Steve Izma wrote:
> Doesn't this depend on the definition of a word boundary?
Yes. I admit I've done no testing or research for this thread, but
past experience tells me that the \% escape treats whitespace and not
much else as a word separator. For instance, I've found that
"\%Abr
> Why would you want a table *inside* a paragraph rather than
> starting a new paragraph after a table?
The table may be in a floating keep (e.g. .KF in -ms mmacros).
Then it's quite likely to pop up in the middle of a paragraph.
The suggestion to cause .TE to insert space would pose minimal
th
On Sat, Jul 25, 2020 at 09:18:56AM -0500, Dave Kemper wrote:
> Subject: Re: \: re-enables hyphenation--should it?
>
> I'd mildly prefer to see \:'s hyphenation-reset behavior changed. \%
> changes meaning depending on whether it's at the start or in the
> middle of a word, and your examples illus
This behavior is not what I would have expected either.
I'd mildly prefer to see \:'s hyphenation-reset behavior changed. \%
changes meaning depending on whether it's at the start or in the
middle of a word, and your examples illustrate that it's acting with
its beginning-of-word meaning when it
On 7/25/20, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
>> Can we have a Savannah bug category for "Macro - me", please?
>
> Added.
Thanks, everyone, for adding this. I see all relevant open bugs have
had their category updated now, too -- thanks, Branden.
Does anyone ever collect data on closed groff bug reports fo
> This behaviour has been around long enough that by now, I
> think almost all authors have become used to inserting .PP,
> .Pp, or the equivalent in whatever macro set they are using,
> or some .sp if they are using no macro set, right after .TE.
I will argue that fixing this particular problem
Hi Branden,
this is not specific to -Tascii/-Tutf8 output. Even in -Tps/-Tpdf
output, observe that the vertical distance from the first line in
the table to the second line in the table is the same as the vertical
distance from the second line in the table to the first line after
the table. That
This looks like a bug to me. I first observed this in my recent
tutorial additions to groff_man(7) about indentation and the left
margin. When you use boxed tables without subsequent vertical spacing
with the grotty postprocessor, the table end overlaps the following text
line.
$ cat tbl-and-nro
11 matches
Mail list logo
