Hi Ralph,
At 2022-01-04T09:17:42+, Ralph Corderoy wrote:
> Hi Branden,
>
> > > > .MR ls 1 .
> > >
> > > That’s nice and all, but still inconsistent with p9p -man. There,
> > > you’d do
> > >
> > > .MR ls (1) .
> >
> > Yes; the typing of parentheses seems to serve no purpose in a
> > sema
Hi Branden,
> > > .MR ls 1 .
> >
> > That’s nice and all, but still inconsistent with p9p -man. There,
> > you’d do
> >
> > .MR ls (1) .
>
> Yes; the typing of parentheses seems to serve no purpose in a semantic
> macro, as noted above.
Given groff didn't get there first, why should it be
Quoth G. Branden Robinson:
That’s nice, but s,Plan 9,plan9port,.
I am aware of the distinction but, really, does anyone _else_ maintain
Plan 9's troff? It seems to me that the Plan 9 porters have adopted an
uncontested mantle of responsibility. Does Vita Nuova work on it?
The thing closest
Hi Humm,
Thanks for your very nice email. After so long it's probably a good
time to loop back with Russ Cox as well.
At 2020-08-15T20:23:51-0400, Russ Cox wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 15, 2020 at 7:27 AM G. Branden Robinson
> wrote:
> >
> > Plan 9 went and did an interesting thing[1]. They implemente
Hi, James!
At 2021-08-26T10:22:00-0400, James K. Lowden wrote:
> On Sat, 14 Aug 2021 01:57:49 +1000
> "G. Branden Robinson" wrote:
>
> > A tradition, acquired at tremendous cost, has grown up
> > around C++ over the past couple of decades that a project in the
> > language is unmanageable and un
On Sat, 14 Aug 2021 01:57:49 +1000
"G. Branden Robinson" wrote:
> A tradition, acquired at tremendous cost, has grown up
> around C++ over the past couple of decades that a project in the
> language is unmanageable and unmaintainable if you don't
> articulate--and stick to--the subset of it that
[Alex, this starting to meander afield from man page issues]
At 2021-08-13T14:30:42+0200, Ingo Schwarze wrote:
> Hi Branden,
>
> G. Branden Robinson wrote on Wed, Aug 11, 2021 at 12:58:31AM +1000:
>
> > (Did I digress some?)
>
> To digress even more: combining the enigmatic character of TeX err
Hi Branden,
G. Branden Robinson wrote on Wed, Aug 11, 2021 at 12:58:31AM +1000:
> (Did I digress some?)
To digress even more: combining the enigmatic character of TeX error
reporting with the verbosity of C++ error reporting would get you
to the Mariana Trench of usability.
> At any rate, I don
Hi, Ingo!
At 2021-08-04T14:46:18+0200, Ingo Schwarze wrote:
> G. Branden Robinson wrote on Wed, Aug 04, 2021 at 02:06:09PM +1000:
>
> > I owe Doug McIlroy an apology for, some months ago on this list,
> > significantly understating his diligence as editor of Volume 1 of
> > the Version 7 Unix man
Sweeps like Branden's, to check consistency, were part and parcel of
editing v7-v10 manuals. He found one worth doing that apparently
hadn't occurred to me. I'm glad the error rate was low.
.
I have always disliked boldface in synopses. That's an artifact of the
CAT phototypesetter, which had roo
Hi,
G. Branden Robinson wrote on Thu, Aug 05, 2021 at 05:50:49PM +1000:
> At 2021-08-05T00:04:46+1000, John Gardner wrote:
>> Ingo Schwarze wrote:
>>> But the mdoc(7) and man(7) languages can also be regarded as
>>> languages with a grammar
>> I wish people would stop referring to these as "lang
At 2021-08-05T00:04:46+1000, John Gardner wrote:
> > But the mdoc(7) and man(7) languages can also be regarded as
> > languages with a grammar
>
> I wish people would stop referring to these as "languages". They're
> macro packages, plain and simple: their "syntax" is that of the
> language they'r
>
> But the mdoc(7) and man(7) languages can also be regarded as languages
> with a grammar
I wish people would stop referring to these as "languages". They're macro
packages, plain and simple: their "syntax" is that of the language they're
written in, Roff. How mandoc(1) implements and parses th
Hi Branden,
G. Branden Robinson wrote on Wed, Aug 04, 2021 at 02:06:09PM +1000:
> I owe Doug McIlroy an apology for, some months ago on this list,
> significantly understating his diligence as editor of Volume 1 of the
> Version 7 Unix manual (1979). A meticulously numerical accounting of
> just
Hi Alejandro,
Alejandro Colomar (man-pages) wrote on Wed, Aug 04, 2021 at 11:44:32AM +0200:
> On 8/4/21 10:57 AM, G. Branden Robinson wrote:
>> The other hole in man(7) functionality that pains me, and which I
>> see people deploying ersatz simulacra thereof, is the list.[3] Our
>>
Hi Alejandro,
Alejandro Colomar (man-pages) wrote on Wed, Aug 04, 2021 at 08:59:21AM +0200:
> Is it possible to use more than one macro package at the same time?
Branden already explained well how it is possible to use multiple
auxiliary macro packages in addition to one full-service package,
in
Hi, Branden!
On 8/4/21 10:57 AM, G. Branden Robinson wrote:
[...]
I pretty much share Dave Kemper's perspective on this, to which I would
add, if mdoc were going to bury man(7) in the backyard, it's had 30
years to do so. Waiting longer is not going to clear man(7)'s problems
off of our plate.
Hi, Alex!
At 2021-08-03T09:29:14+0200, Alejandro Colomar (man-pages) wrote:
> Thinking about it twice...
I think your reconsideration is based on some assumptions that are too
categorical.
> Given mdoc(7) already implemented that, and that the basic difference
> between mdoc(7) and man(7) is bas
Hi Alex,
Short answer: yes, but no. Not in this case.
At 2021-08-04T08:59:21+0200, Alejandro Colomar (man-pages) wrote:
> Something that I already had in mind some time ago came to my mind
> again with this. I don't know much of groff, so it may not be
> possible, but I'll ask anyway.
>
> Is i
Hi Alex & Ingo,
I owe Doug McIlroy an apology for, some months ago on this list,
significantly understating his diligence as editor of Volume 1 of the
Version 7 Unix manual (1979). A meticulously numerical accounting of
just one aspect of that effort follows in this (lengthy) email.
At 2021-08-0
Hi Alejandro,
Alejandro Colomar (man-pages) wrote on Tue, Aug 03, 2021 at 10:23:09PM +0200:
> On 8/3/21 4:30 PM, Ingo Schwarze wrote:
>> Alejandro Colomar (man-pages) wrote on Tue, Aug 03, 2021 at 09:29:14AM +0200:
[...]
>> 2. I find it easier to remember that a function name needs .Fn
>>
On 8/3/21, Ingo Schwarze wrote:
> When maintaining a programming or markup language, sparingly and
> cautiously adding new syntax to fill isolated gaps in the feature set
> often makes sense.
>
> When a language is designed from the ground up with one programming
> paradigm in mind - physical mark
Hi, Ingo!
On 8/3/21 4:30 PM, Ingo Schwarze wrote:
Hello Alejandro,
Alejandro Colomar (man-pages) wrote on Tue, Aug 03, 2021 at 09:29:14AM +0200:
Thinking about it twice...
Given mdoc(7) already implemented that, and that the basic difference
between mdoc(7) and man(7) is basically that man(7
Hello Alejandro,
Alejandro Colomar (man-pages) wrote on Tue, Aug 03, 2021 at 09:29:14AM +0200:
> Thinking about it twice...
>
> Given mdoc(7) already implemented that, and that the basic difference
> between mdoc(7) and man(7) is basically that man(7) is simple and
> doesn't have semantic macr
Hi, Branden!
On 8/1/21 1:09 PM, G. Branden Robinson wrote:
I support this plan ;-)
Cool! I'm glad to see some discussion about it...it would be _so nice_
to land this and OSC 8 hyperlinks for terminal emulators in grotty(1)
for the next groff release. Those would be new features we could rea
Hi Branden,
note that mdoc(7) has most of what you are talking about - not just
as a freshly invented concept yet to be tested, but actively used
and proven adequate in practice. In particular the .Xr macro has
seen consititent use in all mdoc(7) manual pages for more than 30 years,
and it has be
Hi, Branden!
On 8/1/21 1:09 PM, G. Branden Robinson wrote:
Hi, Alex!
Welcome to the groff list!
At 2021-07-31T16:54:43+0200, Alejandro Colomar (man-pages) wrote:
Here's what I would have done differently or in addition.
* Named the macro MR ("manual reference") to give it even more semantic
Hi, Alex!
Welcome to the groff list!
At 2021-07-31T16:54:43+0200, Alejandro Colomar (man-pages) wrote:
> > Here's what I would have done differently or in addition.
> >
> > * Named the macro MR ("manual reference") to give it even more semantic
> > weight. If "IM" is mnemonic for something, I
Sorry for missing CCs. I'm new to this mailing list, and didn't know
how to find the list of CCs.
Hi Branden,
[CCing Russ Cox out of the blue; Russ, I work on GNU roff]
Hi folks,
Plan 9 went and did an interesting thing[1]. They implemented a macro
just for man page cross-references.
As y
> Embedding a full URL in man pages sources to an inherently relocatable
page hierarchy is a bad idea.
I'm sorry, what.
man://1/grep
man://grep/1
man:grep(1)
Syntactic bikeshedding notwithstanding, I fail to see why using the `
*scheme*:*path*` syntax could be construed as a bad idea. (Unless,
On Sat, Aug 15, 2020 at 7:27 AM G. Branden Robinson
wrote:
>
> Plan 9 went and did an interesting thing[1]. They implemented a macro
> just for man page cross-references.
I am amazed you found that so quickly.
> * Uses \X escapes to throw X commands at the output device enabling the
> synthes
G. Branden Robinson wrote in
<20200815112655.xow4f3d4dcdaiaui@localhost.localdomain>:
|[CCing Russ Cox out of the blue; Russ, I work on GNU roff]
|
|Plan 9 went and did an interesting thing[1]. They implemented a macro
|just for man page cross-references.
...
|[1] https://github.com/9fans/
[CCing Russ Cox out of the blue; Russ, I work on GNU roff]
Hi folks,
Plan 9 went and did an interesting thing[1]. They implemented a macro
just for man page cross-references.
As you may recall, I've been itching since 2017 to similarly improve our
own man(7) implementation. I wish I had known
33 matches
Mail list logo
