[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: custom NS and NE man(7) macros
From: |
G. Branden Robinson |
Subject: |
Re: custom NS and NE man(7) macros |
Date: |
Tue, 26 Sep 2023 10:41:02 -0500 |
[It looks like Doug hybridized our thread over to TUHS again. :D
Forwarding my reply thence back to the groff list.]
Hi Doug,
At 2023-09-26T09:38:07-0400, Douglas McIlroy wrote:
> > You didn't say, but I reckon this is a survey of man(7) macros that
> > might be considered extensions?
>
> My presentation was too cute for my own good. I pointed out the
> consistency of xS/xE for various x.
Oh!
> I apologized for EX/EE, which varied from that form
It seems then that we are owed an apology from other quarters for
`EQ`/`EN`. ;-)
> (as UR/UE did more recently),
There is also `MT`/`ME`, another groff 1.20 extension.
> and I questioned OQ/CQ, which utterly breaks it.
I proposed `QO`/`QC`, but yes, the same is true of that letter ordering.
> The intended point was that one should have a strong rationale
> for deviating from established custom, and thereby fostering
> mental overload.
Fair. I'm fine with renaming my proposed quotation macros `QS`/`QE`.
Something I'm still mulling over is how one would specify to these new
macros that they should not perform a break. Or maybe they should
perform no break by default. That would seem to be the more common
expected case.
Regards,
Branden
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature