groff
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [Groff] troff syntax and useability


From: Tadziu Hoffmann
Subject: Re: [Groff] troff syntax and useability
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 17:52:55 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.3.22.1i

Sorry, couldn't resist...  see Ted Harding's answer for a more
serious reply.

> troff syntax is horribly terse. The macros are better, but not
> that much better, IMHO.

Funny thing, but when I need to write some macros, I find myself
using two-character names all the time.  Is this because I'm a
dinosaur unable to adapt?  Maybe, but I think it's also an
attitude of spite... to show those Windows users that we're
still competitive with our outdated software.

> Why can't it be made easier or more obvious?

Standard runoff had a similar syntax with plaintext commands.
It hasn't survived.  (Except maybe on VMS.)
(But I think this has more to do with the fact that it wasn't
programmable like troff.)

> if I pick up troff, use it for something, then put it down
> again, when I come back to use it the next time I find I have
> to re-learn a lot of stuff.

You simply haven't used it enough to get acquainted with the
intricate details.  Once you stick together a major set of
macros you'll find that troff also stays with you.

> If my aim is to produce postscript, why should I have to start
> with something that is more difficult than postscript?

Making something more difficult than Postscript isn't very hard.
Postscript is an extremely simple and elegant language.

> Debugging is hellish.

Not more so than debugging Fortran... simply add some print
statements along the way.
(However, we might consider adding something like a
post-mortem core analyzer to groff. :-)

> Admittedly, the requests and macros make sense *after* you've
> learned them -- but not before and the appearance on the page
> of terse, two-letter 'commands' makes learning troff too much
> of a memory test.

Ah, but that's "the Unix way".  The initial learning curve is
steep, but the rewards plentiful.  This is in contrast to most
wysiwyg programs, which make simple tasks appear very easy, but
which make complex tasks nearly impossible.

Anyhow, the requests have two-letter names for the same reason
that most Unix operating system utilities have two-letter
names...  you must prove yourself worthy of this fine software
by demonstrating the sacrifices you are willing to undergo to
be taken up into the circle of the initiated.  It's a way for
distinguishing between "them" and "us".

> I want to use troff to typeset -- not for the intellectual
> challenge of learning troff nor for the sake of Unix ritual
> purity.

Typesetting is an art that can't be rushed and that requires the
right frame of mind.  Learning troff provides this frame of
mind.  It's a form of meditation that lets you focus on the task
at hand without being distracted by all the fancy features of
word processors.

> But the worst problem is this -- it's not much *fun*.

It *is*.  And it's an intellectually very stimulating exercise.


No offense meant.  (And it feels great when I know I don't have
to take myself too seriously.)

Tadziu



reply via email to

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