Follow-up Comment #4, bug #66051 (group groff): [comment #2 comment #2:] > It makes total sense and also seems a duplicate of bug #42870. I guess I'm not seeing what's "more modest" about that one.
The fix I have in mind for bug #42870 will address (I have it pending, with
passing regression test) this issue:
input=".
.ec @
.ll 1n
r@['e]sum@['e]
.hcode @['e] e
r@['e]sum@['e]
.hcode @['E] @['e]
R@['E]SUM@['E]
.pl @n[nl]u
."
output=$(echo "$input" | "$groff" -a -ww -Wbreak)
echo "$output"
# Expected output:
#
# <beginning of page>
# r<'e>sum<'e>
# r<'e><hy>
# sum<'e>
# R<'E><hy>
# SUM<'E>
Whereas *this* one will make possible:
.hcode \[ss] \[ss]
The fix I have in mind for bug #42780 does not.
> If anything, the way it's worded, _this_ one seems more modest, as it's
asking for support of only special characters, and only for .hcode, whereas
#42870 (per its original submission wording) asks for support of "any
characters entities," for .hw and .hcode.
I may still be having trouble understanding completely what that one's asking
for, and/or whether making the change here will cause the desired `hw`
functionality to just "shake out" or not.
I'll need another test for that.
_______________________________________________________
Reply to this item at:
<https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?66051>
_______________________________________________
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.gnu.org/
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
