Follow-up Comment #10, bug #68133 (group groff):
> When you translate a character to an escape sequence that does not represent
> a character, you might get an unbreakable space, you might get nothing, or
> you might get a backslash.
So in other words, this is undefined (implementation-defined) behaviour that
ought to be documented as such. Users should be informed that translating
non-character escape sequences[1] is unportable behaviour, and they should
avoid depending on it in their documents.
> There's no need for the coming generations of *roff users
What's the real rationale for changing the semantics of `.tr`? Making GNU
Troff approachable for future generations of users? Or improving portability
to other variants of _troff_?
[1] "Non-character escape sequences" := those that don't idempotently expand
to a single-character string.
_______________________________________________________
Reply to this item at:
<https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?68133>
_______________________________________________
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.gnu.org/
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
