> I don't see anything weird or fancy that hasn't been a part of groff > for at least fifteen years. To what are you referring? I'm > intrigued.
Perhaps my word choices weren't so good. "Weird, fancy" is kind of subjective, actually. I still do think that my macros are using "weird, fancy" stuff, not least because it takes advantage of Troff's ability to seemingly rewrite itself? About the stack implementation, I just had this weird idea of escaping the macro definition within the macro definition with backslashes and see if it works and stuff. However, Troff's ability to take values of a numerical register and use it as a name to another register (.nr my_\na_\nb) intrigues me very much. I'm not exactly sure how I found this ability, but I think I found it by accident. Then I decided to extend my accident and make a reverse polish notation calculator in Troff, which seems to work for some reason. ( https://rosettacode.org/wiki/Parsing/RPN_calculator_algorithm#N.2Ft.2Froff) Nonetheless, I find it rather interesting that Troff can use parts of itself to rewrite itself. I've never seen other programming languages able to do this, but I do think there are a few like this that I've not heard of yet. On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 6:04 AM, Peter Schaffter <pe...@schaffter.ca> wrote: > On Tue, Dec 05, 2017, Stephanie Björk wrote: > > as my macros really use weird, fancy stuff. > > I don't see anything weird or fancy that hasn't been a part of groff > for at least fifteen years. To what are you referring? I'm > intrigued. > > -- > Peter Schaffter > http://www.schaffter.ca > >
