On 9/17/14, Werner LEMBERG w...@gnu.org wrote:
It would be interesting to see your real-case situation. Can you
elaborate on that?
Sadly, no. I created the example file on my system over a year ago,
intending to post it at the time, but I never got around to it. I no
longer recall what
.nm +1
Text before diversion.
Text before diversion.
Text before diversion.
Text before diversion.
Text before diversion.
Text before diversion.
Text before diversion.
Text before diversion.
.br
.di my_diversion
Diverted text.
Diverted text.
Diverted text.
Diverted text.
Diverted text.
Diverted
The problem with the above input can be seen in either text or
PostScript output in groff 1.22.2. Using nroff, the output is
I think you're using the diversion wrong.
Diversions are meant for storing *formatted* text. If you're not
replaying the diversion in no-fill mode (and you're not),
Dave Kemper saint.s...@gmail.com wrote:
.nm +1
Text before diversion.
Text before diversion.
Text before diversion.
Text before diversion.
Text before diversion.
Text before diversion.
Text before diversion.
Text before diversion.
.br
.di my_diversion
Diverted text.
Diverted text.
On 9/17/14, Tadziu Hoffmann hoffm...@usm.uni-muenchen.de wrote:
I think you're using the diversion wrong.
This is, admittedly, an artificial example cooked up to illustrate the
behavior. This is clearly a situation where a diversion, or even a
macro, would be unnecessary at all.
The question
Dave Kemper saint.s...@gmail.com wrote:
The question I'm posing is whether a user who uses a diversion in this
wrong (or, let's say, less than optimal)
Wrong is the correct word here.
manner should see output
that is so clearly not what was intended, or whether the software
should do
The question I'm posing is whether a user who uses a
diversion in this wrong (or, let's say, less than optimal)
manner should see output that is so clearly not what was
intended, or whether the software should do something
intelligent with the user's suboptimal input, producing
output that
Dave --
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014, Dave Kemper wrote:
On 9/17/14, Tadziu Hoffmann hoffm...@usm.uni-muenchen.de wrote:
I think you're using the diversion wrong.
This is, admittedly, an artificial example cooked up to illustrate the
behavior. This is clearly a situation where a diversion, or
When I opened a report in the bug tracker on this, Werner responded
that this is working as designed.
I still think so.
While I understand the design of how diversions are implemented, and
why that implementation might produce these results, I contend that
this design is so poor as to be
