[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[bug #63332] recent fallbacks.tmac change degrades ASCII output
From: |
Dave |
Subject: |
[bug #63332] recent fallbacks.tmac change degrades ASCII output |
Date: |
Thu, 1 Dec 2022 04:20:40 -0500 (EST) |
Follow-up Comment #10, bug #63332 (project groff):
Replying to the rest of comment #5, as promised. Some of it may be moot; I'm
not sure how far the miscommunication extended that was resolved in comment
#8, so I'll try not to belabor points that may no longer be relevant. Feel
free to ask for clarification if I skim over anything too much.
> So here's my new patch.
Now applied, so we're good here.
> I'm dubious about tty-char.tmac's definition of \(rn.
Looking at it now, I agree with this--but it's also been unchanged for over 20
years. (Maybe readers just have low expectations for equations rendered on
the terminal.)
> Well, character definitions aren't coupled in any way, as far
> as I know, to the "troff/nroff mode" bit in the formatter.
Right, not by default, but I was talking about the explicit coupling provided
by the definitions sequestered behind tests for that mode.
> > I presume this is because tmac/troffrc
<http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/groff.git/tree/tmac/troffrc> loads
fallbacks.tmac
> > _before_ loading the device-specific .tmac file.
>
> Right. The device description file doesn't say whether it's a
> "troff" or "nroff" device; instead a request does that.
Understood; my point is that this request is invoked after fallbacks.tmac is
processed, mooting those aforementioned tests.
> Post-1.23 it might be worth looking into loading fallbacks.tmac
> later, and maybe combining it with tty-char.tmac in some way.
OK. But for 1.23 itself, without further mitigation, a few characters will
render badly on terminals (e.g., as in comment #7).
Then again, their 1.22.4 rendering was a warning message and a complete
omission of the characters, so this is, if not a step forward, at least not
one backward either.
> But more important is understanding how `character_exists()`
> _really_ works, or I predict only more frustration.
Yes, and this is fine to defer.
> It seems even baby steps toward Unicode are fraught with peril.
Babies do teeter and fall a lot.
_______________________________________________________
Reply to this item at:
<https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?63332>
_______________________________________________
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.gnu.org/
- [bug #63332] recent fallbacks.tmac change degrades ASCII output,
Dave <=