Re: [Groff] tbl using \$_

[walter harms]

Am 14.01.2011 20:29, schrieb Tadziu Hoffmann:
> 
>> This works fine but it is not a future proof solution :)
> 
> Hmmm.  Why not?
> 
> 
>> what takes me wonder is the question what went wrong with \$_ ?
> 
> I don't know where the "\$_" comes from.  It's not in the tbl
> manpage, nor in the original tbl paper from Bell Labs.

I got it from UTP page 487. This is my basic source.


> Tbl can do two different line fills.  "\_" as the only cell
> content will draw a line with the width of the column's other
> contents;  "_" as the only cell content will draw a line the
> full width of the column (this is what the UTP says "\$_"
> will do; might this be an error?).  However, in both cases
> the line will be raised to about the center of the lowercase
> letters, not below the baseline as you would like to have.

I read it this way:
|\_|    will result in  |  --------  |
|\$_|   will result in  |------------|



> 
> 
>> and can some one make the \*_ solution more flexable so it
>> will fill the whole column automaticly ?
> 
> What, in your opinion, should determine the width of the column?
> 
> One quick and dirty solution for the automatic fill would be
> 
>   .ds _ \v'.1m'\D'l \\n[3w2]u 0'\v'-.1m'
> 
> where 3w0 refers to the width of first column, 3w1 to that
> of the second column, 3w2 to that of the third column, etc.,
> but this is not a solution to be recommended since it depends
> on the internals of tbl's implementation.
> 
> 

so far i understand the \_ and \$_ are tbl commands so it would be fine.


>> (i have changed the 6c every time this works for me but may be
>> not for others)
> 
> I had thought it was an advantage to be able to specify the
> width explicitly, given your example where it was supposed
> to be a space reserved for remarks...
> 
It is not a major problem. I had more tables in the same style
(sometimes more or less columns).

re,
 wh