[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: <OK> Re: [Groff] soelim and file names defined in string registers

From: Keith MARSHALL
Subject: Re: <OK> Re: [Groff] soelim and file names defined in string registers
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 14:42:47 +0100

Mike Bianchi wrote:
>>> (it just would be nice if the `.so' request _could_ interpolate the
>>> string register value)
>> Indeed, but I don't see how to do that properly.
> Maybe soelim(1) could recognize that the argument is not a file name
> ( \ being a dead giveaway ) and simply leave the reference in place for
> interpretation by groff?

This is exactly what happens, at present.

> As long at the referenced file does not require preprocessor
> interpolation ... which case, `soelim' isn't really required, in the first place; it
doesn't become necessary, until you have content in a `.so'd file, which
*does* require interpretation by a preprocessor.

> And maybe have groff recognize a special form of .so :
>                .so filename [ preprocessor_command_line ]
>   .e.g.
>                .ds filename FILENAME
>                .so \*[filename] "tbl -  |  eqn -"
> implies
>                cat FILENAME  |  tbl -  | eqn -
> or equivalently
>                <FILENAME  tbl -  |   eqn -

May appear attractive, at first glance, but still inevitably suffers
from the limitations Tadziu mentioned -- each `.so' so deferred is
processed in isolation, and normally global declarations such as

        delim ##

don't propagate as expected.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]