26 Sep
2023
26 Sep
'23
7:38 p.m.
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. I apologized for EX/EE, which
varied from that form (as UR/UE did more recently), and I
questioned OQ/CQ, which utterly breaks it.
The intended point was that one should have a strong rationale
for deviating from established custom, and thereby fostering
mental overload.
Doug
26 Sep
26 Sep
7:58 p.m.
New subject: custom NS and NE man(7) macros
Hi Doug,
At 2023-09-26T09:38:07-0400, Douglas McIlroy wrote:
Oh!
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. 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
452
days inactive
452
days old
1 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
Douglas McIlroy -
G. Branden Robinson