> I wonder, though, if the small emendation to the docs,
> above, might be a good idea anyway, for clarity.
Yes. I vote in favor of this change.
On Fri, Nov 04, 2016, Tadziu Hoffmann wrote:
>
> > Should it say, instead:
> >
> > "...the amount of vertical space truncated from a .sp request
> >^^
> > by the most recently sprung vertical position trap..."
>
> I believe that's how i
> Should it say, instead:
>
> "...the amount of vertical space truncated from a .sp request
>^^
> by the most recently sprung vertical position trap..."
I believe that's how it was meant.
The info file has this to say:
[...] at the
On Thu, Nov 03, 2016, Tadziu Hoffmann wrote:
>
> If you request a certain amount of vertical space,
>
> .sp
>
> and the distance to the next trap (available in register .t)
> is smaller than this, the trap is sprung and .trunc is set to
>
>-
>
> i.e., the amount truncated (not output)
If you request a certain amount of vertical space,
.sp
and the distance to the next trap (available in register .t)
is smaller than this, the trap is sprung and .trunc is set to
-
i.e., the amount truncated (not output) from .
(See attached example; use -Tps and paper size a4.)
It's in
> According to the info docs, .trunc is "a read-only register
> containing the amount of vertical space truncated by the most
> recently sprung vertical position trap." However, if I insert
>
> .tm page \\n[%] \\n[.trunc]
>
> at the very top of a trap-invoked footer macro that coincides with
I'm baffled.
According to the info docs, .trunc is "a read-only register containing
the amount of vertical space truncated by the most recently sprung
vertical position trap." However, if I insert
.tm page \\n[%] \\n[.trunc]
at the very top of a trap-invoked footer macro that coincides with
m
