[bug #64360] [gropdf] does not correctly handle white space after 'w' command

[G. Branden Robinson]

Follow-up Comment #18, bug #64360 (project groff):

If it's a bug for a 'w' command to be missing when it _should_ be there, then
it appears my change in comment #8 is fixing one.

I'm not sure what the root-cause is, but I saw the following when updating my
test case expectations to accommodate it.


diff --git a/tmac/tests/doc_heading-font-remapping-works.sh
b/tmac/tests/doc_heading-font-remapping-works.sh
index 27f51964b..b033cd46a 100755
--- a/tmac/tests/doc_heading-font-remapping-works.sh
+++ b/tmac/tests/doc_heading-font-remapping-works.sh
@@ -34,25 +34,27 @@ input='.Dd 2022-12-26
 .Dt foo 1
 .Os "groff test suite"
 .Sh Name
 .Nm foo
 .Nd frobnicate a bar
 .Sh Hacking Xr groff
 Have fun!'
 
 output=$(printf "%s\n" "$input" | "$groff" -mdoc -Tascii -Z)
 echo "$output"
 
 echo "$output" | sed -n '/tHacking/{n
+/w/{n
 /x font 4 BI/{n
 /f4/{n
 /h/{n
 /tgroff/{n
 /n/{n
 /f1/p;}
 }
 }
 }
 }
+}
 }' | grep -Fqx f1
 
 # vim:set ai et sw=4 ts=4 tw=72:


I trust I will not draw contradiction when I claim that there is definitely a
word space between "Hacking" and "groff", given the input.  (Perhaps this
actually arises from the other change, the one in comment #5; mdoc may be
putting unbreakable spaces in section headings, or maybe in cross reference
link text.  If so, I'm not sure either choice is categorically right, but I'll
fry that fish some other time.)

Just a data point.




    _______________________________________________________

Reply to this item at:

  <https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?64360>

_______________________________________________
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.gnu.org/