Re: [Groff] Re: .substring bug - indicies don't work as documented(?)

[Werner LEMBERG]

> >   for s=abcdefg .substring s  0   yields "g"
> >   for s=abcdefg .substring s  1   yields "abcdefg"
> >   for s=abcdefg .substring s  2   yields "bcdefg"
> >
> BTW how about defining a single argument meaning the corresponding
> character, e.g. ".substring s 1" the first letter and ".substring
> -1" the last letter.

I prefer the current syntax, i.e., no second argument (i.e., set to
zero) means `take the rest'.  This is probably the very reason to make
the last character have the index 0.

> It is illogical to start with 1 from the front and with 0 from the
> end.  Moreover, 0 means everything up to behind the last character;
> so the last character should be -1 anyway.

I agree, but I think it isn't worth the trouble.

> Also 2 args in reversed order could be made into reversing the
> output.

Who needs that?


    Werner