[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Groff] names in groff -- was: Another hdtbl patch
From: |
Werner LEMBERG |
Subject: |
Re: [Groff] names in groff -- was: Another hdtbl patch |
Date: |
Mon, 08 Feb 2010 07:18:13 +0100 (CET) |
> I'm thinking groff needs the concept of namespace .
I don't think so. This concept is not very meaningful for something
which gets interpreted at runtime. The only benefit would be that you
can shorten the macro names slightly. However, groff still had to
look up the real macro names, which would consist of the namespace
prefix (plus e.g. a space character so that it never clashes with a
user-defined macro name) and the macro name found in the source code.
Werner
- Re: [Groff] Another hdtbl patch, (continued)
- Re: [Groff] Another hdtbl patch, Werner LEMBERG, 2010/02/03
- Re: [Groff] Another hdtbl patch, Robert Thorsby, 2010/02/03
- Re: [Groff] Another hdtbl patch, Mike Bianchi, 2010/02/03
- Re: [Groff] Another hdtbl patch, Werner LEMBERG, 2010/02/04
- Re: [Groff] Another hdtbl patch, Ralph Corderoy, 2010/02/05
- [Groff] names in groff -- was: Another hdtbl patch, Mike Bianchi, 2010/02/05
- Re: [Groff] names in groff -- was: Another hdtbl patch, walter harms, 2010/02/05
- Re: [Groff] names in groff -- was: Another hdtbl patch,
Werner LEMBERG <=
- Re: [Groff] Another hdtbl patch, Tadziu Hoffmann, 2010/02/04
- Re: [Groff] Another hdtbl patch, Robert Thorsby, 2010/02/04
- Re: [Groff] Another hdtbl patch, Tadziu Hoffmann, 2010/02/04