[bug #63812] Discussion of conditional expressions in docs should mention `.if h`

[G. Branden Robinson]

Follow-up Comment #6, bug #63812 (project groff):


[comment #5 comment #5:]
> The projected likelihood of introducing such a backwards-incompatible
feature is marginal at best, and indicative of feature creep at worst.

Muahahahaha.  You don't know of my plans for groff 1.24.

Long stories short, I want a `for` request that will iterate over
macros/strings/diversions, and new conditional operators to test for "nodes"
and for glyphs that are _actually defined_ in the current font, as opposed to
interposed via character definitions.


    _______________________________________________________

Reply to this item at:

  <https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?63812>

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