On 14.03.25 11:06, Robert Goulding wrote:
> A display (introduced by .LD) needs a closing .DE macro. And I would also
> close a heading macro with a paragraphing macro. Yes, your method may get
> visually the right results, but it may be unpredictable, since some
> housekeeping behind the scene
Hi Erik,
At 2025-03-14T09:00:50+, dvalin--- via GNU roff typesetting system
discussion wrote:
> Ah, well, that was initially for wrapping after the .I line, then it
> was Vim's autoindent. I provided the space needed after the trailing
> comma, to separate words ... erroneously as you're so s
On 14.03.25 09:33, Robert Goulding wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 14, 2025 at 9:14 AM dvalin--- via GNU roff typesetting system
> > AHA! Squirrelled away under "4.6.5.8 Keeps, boxed keeps, and displays",
> > there's a non-wrapping paragraph, i,e, .LD. That fixes the unwanted
> > wrapping, and .SH overru
On 14.03.25 00:25, G. Branden Robinson wrote:
> At 2025-03-14T04:52:59+, dvalin--- via GNU roff typesetting system
> discussion wrote:
> > The attached "sample.groff" does not flow together lines, following a
> > .PP, expected to compile a paragraph. Yet going the whole .RP trip,
> > for c
On Fri, Mar 14, 2025 at 9:14 AM dvalin--- via GNU roff typesetting system
discussion wrote:
> On 14.03.25 07:29, dvalin--- via GNU roff typesetting system discussion
> wrote:
>
> > It is probable that a neutral terminator for .SH, .LP, and .PP scope,
> could be all that is needed. Then "as presen
On 14.03.25 07:29, dvalin--- via GNU roff typesetting system discussion wrote:
> It is probable that a neutral terminator for .SH, .LP, and .PP scope, could
> be all that is needed. Then "as presented" code or command lines will neither
> be wrapped nor bolded. I'll see what I can find.
AHA! S
On 14.03.25 16:29, Damian McGuckin wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Mar 2025, dvalin--- via GNU roff typesetting system discussion
> wrote:
>
> > It seriously looks like the most productive way forward is to go back to
> > raw troff, or failing to find the secret sauce there, look for a more
> > robust ut
On Fri, 14 Mar 2025, dvalin--- via GNU roff typesetting system discussion wrote:
It seriously looks like the most productive way forward is to go back to
raw troff, or failing to find the secret sauce there, look for a more
robust utility - sufficiently documented to allow basic work.
Did you
At 2025-03-14T04:52:59+, dvalin--- via GNU roff typesetting system
discussion wrote:
> The attached "sample.groff" does not flow together lines, following a
> .PP, expected to compile a paragraph. Yet going the whole .RP trip,
> for conformity's sake, in groff_primer.ms, *does* spuriously flow
The attached "sample.groff" does not flow together lines, following a .PP,
expected to compile a paragraph. Yet going the whole .RP trip, for conformity's
sake, in groff_primer.ms, *does* spuriously flow together successive \n
terminated lines *without* a .PP or .LP, and that's even more useless
10 matches
Mail list logo
