Re: [Groff] Question on string registers and requests

[andlabs]

Here is what I did:

.ds U \\s-1UNIX\\s0 
.U

Here is the command line (pstopdf is the Mac OS X equivalent of ps2pdf):
troff utest | grops | tee utest.ps | pstopdf -i -o utest.pdf

I attached the utest files and the two output files to show you; you may
need to view them in Nabble.
http://www.nabble.com/file/p12829781/utest utest 
http://www.nabble.com/file/p12829781/utest.ps utest.ps 
http://www.nabble.com/file/p12829781/utest.pdf utest.pdf 


Clarke Echols wrote:
> 
> Doesn't work that way.
> 
> If you use:
> 
> .de U
> .\" troff/groff requests and other stuff here
> ..
> 
> to define macro U, then use
> 
> .ds U \\s-1UNIX\\s0
> 
> to define a string named U, the namespace conflict causes macro U
> to be overwritten by the defined string.
> 
> Executing
> 
> .U
> 
> does nothing because macro U was never defined by a .de statement.
> You can interpolate the string using \*U, but that is the only way
> to get the string contents back from the definition.
> 
> andlabs wrote:
>> Hello. I noticed, that given
>> 
>> .ds U \\s-2UNIX\\s0
>> 
>> in a troff file after -ms, and neither -ms nor that file define a macro
>> .U,
>> I could do
>> 
>> .U
>> 
>> and it would be replaced with the contents of that string. Is that a
>> feature
>> of groff? I'd like to clear things up. Thanks.
> 
> 
> 
> 

-- 
View this message in context: 
http://www.nabble.com/Question-on-string-registers-and-requests-tf4498456.html#a12829781
Sent from the Groff - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.