[bug #62042] groff: CHECKSTYLE: (incorrect) warning about blank lines inside .EX/.EE

[Alejandro Colomar]

Follow-up Comment #2, bug #62042 (project groff):

Hi Branden,

[comment #1 comment #1:]
[...]
> All of this said, and _because_ I've had to say it, I feel that the existing
groff_man_style(7) page does not make it clear enough that material within
.EX/.EE is not in a "literal mode".  I intend to make several of the above
points (briefly) in a forthcoming revision.

Don't worry about that; I very well know it's "not" a literal mode.  You
taught me that a long time ago.  I haven't checked groff_man_style(7), though,
and don't know if it needs to be clearer to newcomers; but to me it is.

Buuut, do we want to write code EXAMPLES non-literally?  I mean, to write
those programs, I first write the program, use it, then copy it to the manual
page, and fix the few escape sequences that I find.  Rewriting (or having a
script to transform it into perfect man(7) input) is not something that I'm
not sure if I'm entirely happy with.

Are you sure you want to write programs as pure man(7)?

    _______________________________________________________

Reply to this item at:

  <https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?62042>

_______________________________________________
  Message sent via Savannah
  https://savannah.gnu.org/