[Groff] Introduction

2014-09-11 Thread Robert Bocchino
Hi groff list, As I mentioned to Werner, I'm a professional software engineer, regular groff user, and Unix tool enthusiast, and I'd like to contribute back to groff development. I'm most interested in working on grohtml. I'd like to start with something simple, like a bug fix or a

Re: [Groff] Overview, Sept. 2014

2014-09-11 Thread Ralph Corderoy
Hi, This is getting off-topic. Groff uses a limited form of C++, thus it's still approachable by C programmers. If it starts becoming more C++ and less C then it will lose that possible pool. I think it's widely accepted that C++ is a large complex sprawling language that few understand

Re: [Groff] Overview, Sept. 2014

2014-09-11 Thread Steffen Nurpmeso
Hallo Ingo, Ulrich, list, Ingo Schwarze schwa...@usta.de wrote: [.] |Some things work more or less similarly in git: | | * cvs co module - git clone module | Except that it also mirrors the whole repo including history. Not necessarily. I usually find the advice to clone a repo a bad

Re: [Groff] Overview, Sept. 2014

2014-09-11 Thread Steffen Nurpmeso
lxnf9...@gmail.com wrote: |On Wed, 10 Sep 2014, Werner LEMBERG wrote: | The problem with global variables is their long range effect, | comparable with the infamous goto statement: considered harmful. | | I like `goto' a lot, and it is an invaluable instruction if used with | care. The same

Re: [Groff] Overview, Sept. 2014

2014-09-11 Thread Steffen Nurpmeso
Ulrich Lauther ulrich.laut...@t-online.de wrote: |That templates are not used is a GOOD THING. I disagree with you, templates are a fantastic thing for typesafety. The problem i have with STL is the massive code blow. I instead used all-inline template wrappers of void* based generic collection

Re: [Groff] Overview, Sept. 2014

2014-09-11 Thread Steffen Nurpmeso
Werner LEMBERG w...@gnu.org wrote: | I may have to look into this C++ stuff. I have only written C and I | have not figured out how to write multi-threaded applications | without global variables. And I make good use of goto and | longjmp. Apps would be a lot junkier without them. | |Well,

[Groff] How to clean generated files after build

2014-09-11 Thread Carsten Kunze
Hello, after making distclean or realclean there are still generated files. With which make target can I get rid of them? $ git status # On branch master # Untracked files: # (use git add file... to include in what will be committed) # # src/libs/gnulib/Makefile #

Re: [Groff] How to clean generated files after build

2014-09-11 Thread Ingo Schwarze
Hi Carsten, Carsten Kunze wrote on Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 03:40:58PM +0200: after making distclean or realclean there are still generated files. Known issue, see my bug report https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?42970 Werner's comment is bogus. It has nothing to do with automake. Actually, in the

[Groff] More referenceability for -mdoc would be an improvement!?

2014-09-11 Thread Steffen Nurpmeso
Hello, despite the fact that grohtml produces faulty output for it anyway, i really think that -mdoc would need a few more commands so that it would be possible to create better documents with it, where better refers to usability and user experience. E.g., even mandoc(1) -Tx?html doesn't create

Re: [Groff] Introduction

2014-09-11 Thread Peter Schaffter
Robert -- On Wed, Sep 10, 2014, Robert Bocchino wrote: As I mentioned to Werner, I'm a professional software engineer, regular groff user, and Unix tool enthusiast, and I'd like to contribute back to groff development. Welcome! -- Peter Schaffter http://www.schaffter.ca

Re: [Groff] More referenceability for -mdoc would be an improvement!?

2014-09-11 Thread Ingo Schwarze
Hi Steffen, Steffen Nurpmeso wrote on Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 04:22:22PM +0200: despite the fact that grohtml produces faulty output for it anyway, i really think that -mdoc would need a few more commands so that it would be possible to create better documents with it, where better refers to

Re: [Groff] Overview, Sept. 2014

2014-09-11 Thread James K. Lowden
On Wed, 10 Sep 2014 11:49:37 +0200 Ulrich Lauther ulrich.laut...@t-online.de wrote: other modifications would really improve readability and maintainability: - capitalization of class names - a naming convention for class member variables - reducing the number of

Re: [Groff] Overview, Sept. 2014

2014-09-11 Thread Ulrich Lauther
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 01:11:40PM -0400, James K. Lowden wrote: On Wed, 10 Sep 2014 11:49:37 +0200 Ulrich Lauther ulrich.laut...@t-online.de wrote: other modifications would really improve readability and maintainability: - capitalization of class names - a naming

Re: [Groff] Overview, Sept. 2014

2014-09-11 Thread Clarke Echols
On 09/11/2014 11:57 AM, Ulrich Lauther wrote: On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 01:11:40PM -0400, James K. Lowden wrote: On Wed, 10 Sep 2014 11:49:37 +0200 Ulrich Lauther ulrich.laut...@t-online.de wrote: other modifications would really improve readability and maintainability: -

Re: [Groff] Overview, Sept. 2014

2014-09-11 Thread James K. Lowden
On Thu, 11 Sep 2014 19:57:43 +0200 Ulrich Lauther ulrich.laut...@t-online.de wrote: As I understand it, the man-pages are directed at the user of a program who wants to know WHAT a program is supposed to do and how she can control it via options. On Thu, 11 Sep 2014 14:48:51 -0600 Clarke

Re: [Groff] Overview, Sept. 2014

2014-09-11 Thread Ulrich Lauther
On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 05:46:22PM -0400, James K. Lowden wrote: [ ... ] If by all about Urich meant a sentence or two, sure, a comment block is fine. If by all about he meant a description of the semantics of the public interface (which is what I thought he meant) then ISTM that belongs in a

[Groff] Documenting the Source. (Was: Overview, Sept. 2014)

2014-09-11 Thread Ralph Corderoy
Hi, Ulrich wrote: As I understand it, the man-pages are directed at the user of a program who wants to know WHAT a program is supposed to do and how she can control it via options. Comments in the source are directed at the programmer, who wants to understand HOW the functionality of the

Re: [Groff] Who is doing what

2014-09-11 Thread Bertrand Garrigues
Feel free to use inside the groff project in any way you like, including republishing and including in official lists, but please don't change the content without speaking to me. Bertrand Garrigues: Specific short/medium term

Re: [Groff] Overview, Sept. 2014

2014-09-11 Thread Bertrand Garrigues
Hi Peter, On Tue, Sep 09 2014 at 11:31:38 PM, Peter Schaffter pe...@schaffter.ca wrote: The thread on underlining raised a couple of issues. One is whether a long-established request (.ul) should be updated. The rationale is that it's unlikely anyone in 2014+ needs (or, if young enough,

Re: [Groff] Documenting the Source.

2014-09-11 Thread Werner LEMBERG
I think what's missing is a higher-level view of how the source fits together, and that's probably why Werner's enthusiastic about a comment-block per class. Exactly. Perhaps those on the list that can grok C could have a go at doing Werner's class comments, [...] But would it require