Re: PROPOSED: semantics for an output line length of zero

[John Gardner]

I'm not sure I understand the issue here. For the purposes of line-wrapping
and word-breaking, `.ll 0` is essentially the same as `.ll 1u`... isn't it?
Even in situations when a typesetter's quantum of motion accommodates at
least a single character, the output is still the same; i.e.,

I am \n[.l]u long.

yields

I
am
1u
long.

but also

I
am
0u
long.

Am I missing something?

On Sun, 5 Sept 2021 at 03:36, G. Branden Robinson <
g.branden.robinson@gmail.com> wrote:

> I'm proposing this on behalf on John Gardner, who raised it in a
> Savannah ticket[1].
>
> I asked him:
>
> >> What do you expect the semantics of an output line length of zero to
> >> be?
>
> He said:
>
> > Like this:
> >
> >     This is your line-length
> >
> >     This
> >     is
> >     your
> >     line-
> >     length
> >     on
> >     drugs
> >
> > Basically, print as many characters as you can fit up until the next
> > break opportunity (which could be whitespace or a hyphenation
> > opportunity, depending on hyphenation settings).
>
> This would be an extension to the semantics of the output line length;
> Heirloom Doctools troff (at least) instead clamps the output line length
> to the horizontal resolution.
>
> Does anyone have any thoughts on or objections to this?
>
> Regards,
> Branden
>
> [1] https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?61089
>