>> For example, TeX's hyphenation works on glyphs instead of
>> characters.
>
> Seems to me like a good idea: two different glyphs for the
> same character might have widely differing metrics.
It's a very bad idea since hyphenation is completely independent from
the used glyphs and fonts!
Perhap
> For example, TeX's hyphenation works on glyphs instead of
> characters.
Seems to me like a good idea: two different glyphs for the
same character might have widely differing metrics.
>> Recently, TeX has been extended with a lua interpreter: luaTeX;
>> this seems to be the future, since complete support for OpenType
>> has been already implemented.
>
> Interesting. But I wonder: apart from backwards compatibility,
> wouldn't it make more sense to reimplement the basic routine
> Mhmm, in TeX you have basically the same limitations.
> Both groff and TeX languages are not well suited to such
> operations. Recently, TeX has been extended with a lua
> interpreter: luaTeX; this seems to be the future, since
> complete support for OpenType has been already implemented.
Inte
Werner LEMBERG wrote:
>> I got a reply from Tadziu Hoffman who gave me an idea of making a
>> real stack,
>
> As I mentioned in a previous mail, this works fine for arguments
> without spaces only.
Well, my requirements actually allow me to fit inside that limitation.
>
>> OK, off to your 2nd
> I want to reply to both of your mails here in one mail. First,
> constructing the variable names piece by piece and maintaining
> multiple variables to simulate arrays does seem to me to be kludgy.
Mhmm, in TeX you have basically the same limitations. Both groff and
TeX languages are not well
On December 30, 2009 01:09:07 pm Chuck Robey wrote:
> In a language like groff, anything that works is beautiful.
ROTFL
Elegantly said, Chuck, and true. It ought to be the official motto
of the list.
--
Peter Schaffter
Werner LEMBERG wrote:
>> I need to have (for an html project of mine, which you all know
>> about by now) a stack data structure. I know one *really* klugy way
>> to do it, by having a number register which counts the depth of my
>> stack, and then having a variable which is concatenated to form a
> I need to have (for an html project of mine, which you all know
> about by now) a stack data structure. I know one *really* klugy way
> to do it, by having a number register which counts the depth of my
> stack, and then having a variable which is concatenated to form a
> name like "name0", "nam
Tadziu Hoffmann wrote:
>> I need to have [snip] a stack data structure.
>
> Here's a very rudimentary implementation using strings -- items
> on the stack cannot contain spaces, and no error checking is
> performed, but you get the idea. If necessary, the macros
> can be generalized to accept the
> I need to have [snip] a stack data structure.
Here's a very rudimentary implementation using strings -- items
on the stack cannot contain spaces, and no error checking is
performed, but you get the idea. If necessary, the macros
can be generalized to accept the name of the stack string as
argu
I need to have (for an html project of mine, which you all know about by now) a
stack data structure. I know one *really* klugy way to do it, by having a
number register which counts the depth of my stack, and then having a variable
which is concatenated to form a name like "name0", "name1", etc,
12 matches
Mail list logo
