Follow-up Comment #3, bug #66038 (group groff): Right. I'll clarify that my complaint isn't "the diagnostic won't parrot my input back to me", it's "the diagnostic is emitting a number that seems--to a user not versed in groff internals--unconnected to anything in input."
Two possible ways of addressing this are:
* Stop including a number in the diagnostic at all. If we know the user's
number is long gone, there's little value in reporting a number that's its
third cousin twice removed.
* Reword the diagnostic to make it clear to the user that the number being
reported has been molested by the parser and may bear lasting scars as a
result.
This ticket's reworded summary is not an accurate reflection of what I
want--my request is "don't misquote," not "groff must quote verbatim"--but I
was less than clear about that originally.
_______________________________________________________
Reply to this item at:
<https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?66038>
_______________________________________________
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.gnu.org/
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
