Re: [Groff] inconsistency between .R and \*R in man.tmac

[Clarke Echols]

Why not use

.ft R

or more properly,

.ft 1

which gives the same result with NO macro required???

AT&T Unix never had a .R macro defined that I ever saw...  Certainly
not in the man macros.

Clarke

Bernd Warken wrote:
> 
> groff_man(7) states
> 
>        .R [text]
>               Causes text to appear in roman font.  If no text is
>               present on the line where the macro is called, then
>               the  text  of the next line appears in roman.  This
>               is the default font to which text  is  returned  at
>               the end of processing of the other macros.
> 
>        \*R    The `registered' sign.
> 
> As macros and strings share the same name space this isn't consistent.
> The tmac source implements the string variant.  man(7) does not have
> either of them.
> 
> Maybe the documentation of .R should just removed from groff_man(7).
> That's not too great a loss because the funtionality of .R can be
> achieved by calling .RI with a single argument:
> 
> .RI "This is all in roman font."
> 
> Bernd Warken
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Groff maillist  -  address@hidden
> http://ffii.org/mailman/listinfo/groff