Re: [Groff] Conditional problem: "!" operator after "&"

[Werner LEMBERG]

>> Meanwhile, is this something that would break AT&T troff if groff
>> were to do it right?
> 
> The question is, what is "right"?  I believe you're looking for a
> mapping of integers to booleans, and a "not" operator for booleans.

Well, he's certainly looking for making `!' work within an expression
too.  However, I'm not sure, given the unique `true' and `false'
treatment in troff, whether it is worth the trouble.  Compound
expressions can always split into single ones which are usually far
easier to read and to comprehend – or am I missing something?

>  [ntg]roff already has both (in a way): [...]

Nice!  I haven't thought of this.  Do you think it makes sense to
document this in groff.texinfo?


    Werner