Re: [Groff] spacing bug in 1.19.x

[Werner LEMBERG]

> > Your macro definition of .Se relies on pic internals which are
> > neither documented nor expected to be stable.
>
> Perhaps they are not documented and not expected to be stable, but
> the fact is that they _were_ stable before 1.19.x.
>
> I didn't see that the change has been advertised too much in the
> docs either. :-)

Well, the news is `colour support in pic'.  The code emitted by PIC
before 1.19.x sometimes failed.

> [...]  This is a good solution.  I avoid both \c and '.sp -1' and
> the document looks good.  The only problem is incompatibility with
> older groff versions since gcolor doesn't exist there, but that can
> be worked around if necessary.

Use \n[.x], \n[.y], and \n[.Y] for that.

> > This is a new warning which says that groff can't adjust a line
> > correctly.  And indeed the formula after `(a)' must be printed in
> > a new line.
>
> I do not understand why 1.18.x was able to adjust it and 1.19.x
> isn't.

groff 1.18.x and earlier happily produced exactly the same (bad)
output, but it didn't send a warning.


    Werner