> On 3/6/24, ropers <rop...@gmail.com> wrote: >> -In fact, the ending marker is itself the name of a macro to be >> -called, or a request to be invoked, if it is defined at the time its >> -control line is read. >> +In fact, the ending marker can itself be the name of another macro to be >> +called, or a request to be invoked, provided this is already defined by >> the >> +time the control line containing the ending marker is read. > On 07/03/2024, Dave Kemper <saint.s...@gmail.com> wrote: > One semantic difference between the two versions is that replacing "a > macro" with "another macro" implies that the current macro cannot also > be the end macro. But groff allows this. > > .de repeat repeat > . tm I repeat myself. > .repeat > . > .repeat > > (Bonus points if you can guess without running the code whether this > puts "I repeat myself" on stderr twice or endlessly. (I couldn't.))
1. I withdraw the "nother", no bother. 2. I award myself no points, and may the dot have mercy on me, sole. (Read: The empty request confused me, so I guessed wrong.)
