Re: Groff examples repository

[Keith Marshall]

On 28/08/2021 17:14, Douglas McIlroy wrote:
> A small anomaly. Consider
> 
>     .de .
>     .tm Hi
>     ,..
>     ..

I'm guessing that the comma, before the first ".." is an unintended
introduction?

> The second .. emits "Hi". This fragment also emits "Hi":
> 
>     .de end end
>     .tm Hi
>     .end
> 
> But this (with macro . not previously defined)
> does not:
> 
>     .de . .
>     .tm Hi
>     ..

Even if macro "." were previously defined, the latter should not emit
"Hi".  Footnote 16, in reference to ".de" and its variations, within the
groff reference manual[1], explains this, (with an essentially similar
example): during a macro definition, '..' is never handled as a call to
'.', even if you say '.de foo .' explicitly.

[1]: https://www.gnu.org/software/groff/manual/groff.pdf

(FWIW, I think I would have s/handled/interpreted/)

-- 
Cheers, Keith