Follow-up Comment #3, bug #68216 (group groff):

[comment #2 comment #2:]
> given the lack of additional feedback, and in order to close the issue, I
> believe you may do the following.
> 
> 1. keep the current hyphenation patterns, if they don't clog groff's memory
> (i don't know if there is a test suite to run a benchmark test).

No, but an ad hoc test suggests that any difference from loading, say, English
hyphenation patterns is negligible.

Here's one terminal session (I ran GNU _troff_ interactively):


$ troff -R
.tm \n[$$]
24087
$ troff -R -m es
.tm \*[locale]
spanish
.tm \n[$$]
24105
$ troff -R -m en
.tm \*[locale]
english
.tm \n[$$]
24121


And here's another terminal on the same host:


$ ps -o pid,args,drs 24087
  PID COMMAND                       DRS
24087 troff -R                    13904
$ ps -o pid,args,drs 24105
  PID COMMAND                       DRS
24105 troff -R -m es              14432
$ ps -o pid,args,drs 24121
  PID COMMAND                       DRS
24121 troff -R -m en              14432


> 2. keep the approved changes by Eloi, and push the patch to close the issue.
> 
> I may fix the patch to keep Eloi's approved changes, if required.

I don't have much feedback as I'm not a native Spanish speaker.

However I'm aware of this issue and my intention is to address it for the
_groff_ 1.25.0 release, planned for early July.  For the moment my focus is on
the formatter, as I want to get my fingers *out* of it before chilling the
development temperature as release time gets closer.


    _______________________________________________________

Reply to this item at:

  <https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?68216>

_______________________________________________
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.gnu.org/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to