Re: [Groff] Proposed equation processor additions

[Werner LEMBERG]

> Has anyone tried the EQN processor additions that I submitted 3
> weeks ago, and have any experimenters uncovered any problems?

I've now carefully read your sample_data document, without trying the
examples yet.  A minor thing which slightly disturbs me is that I
always have to use a formatting argument as the first element of
rmatrix.  What do you think of using an optional `col' keyword for
that purpose?  Originally, `col' is equal to `ccol', but this fact
isn't properly described in the original eqn documentation, so it
might be a good candidate for `abusing' it.

  rmatrix "{"
    [ col "{" column_specification "}" ]
    "{" row1 "}"
    "{" row2 "}"
    ...
  "}"

Thus,

  rmatrix {
    { a b }
    { c d }
  }

would be equal to

  rmatrix {
    col { l l }
    { a b }
    { c d }
  }

I could also imagine to make the proposed `col' keyword accept a
string of column formatters instead, similar to tbl:

  col "ll"

This avoids the introduction of the new keywords `c', `l', and `r'.

BTW, could you integrate the rmatrix stuff directly into eqn.y?  How
much work is it?


    Werner