[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Groff] troff syntax and useability
From: |
Peter Schaffter |
Subject: |
Re: [Groff] troff syntax and useability |
Date: |
Tue, 27 Aug 2002 13:36:32 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.3.28i |
Hi.
On Wed, Aug 28, 2002, Rob Scovell wrote:
> I am going to ask a radical question here.
<snip>
> troff syntax is horribly terse. The macros are better, but not that much
> better, IMHO. I am not a regular troff user but I like what it does and
> would like to use it more than I do for the almost total control it gives
> you over layout.
<snip>
> If my aim is to produce postscript, why should I have to start with
> something that is more difficult than postscript?
Nothing radical about your question at all, IMHO. It was for precisely
people asking that question that I wrote the mom macro set. Check it
out, Rob. It's a macro set that, as nearly as I can tell from your
post, deals with all the concerns you raised. I, too, felt the way you
do -- and, because I had the time, went ahead and did something about
it.
> Debugging is hellish.
Tell me about it. :)
> 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.
>
> I would prefer to spend more time and risk more RSI typing out meaningful
> requests and macros that would make the debugging task easier.
>
> Another consideration is that a human editor or author wouldn't want to go
> anywhere near troff code as it stands. They would be less reluctant if it
> were clear what the typesetting code meant, even if they were under strict
> instructions not to monkey with it, as the codes would give them clear
> visual cues when editing the text.
>
> I want to use troff to typeset -- not for the intellectual challenge of
> learning troff nor for the sake of Unix ritual purity.
>
> But the worst problem is this -- it's not much *fun*.
Yep -- on the basis of the paras quoted above, you should check out the
mom macros. And the documentation, which contains a number of passages
that sound eerily like what you just wrote.
--
PTPi
Peter Schaffter
31, Curé-André-Préseault
Appt. 22
Gatineau (Québec)
CANADA J8T 6E4
A confirmed GNU/Linuxer. Sorry, I don't do Windows.
Re: [Groff] troff syntax and useability, Tadziu Hoffmann, 2002/08/27
Re: [Groff] troff syntax and useability, Werner LEMBERG, 2002/08/27
Re: [Groff] troff syntax and useability,
Peter Schaffter <=
Re: [Groff] troff syntax and useability, David Given, 2002/08/27
Re: [Groff] troff syntax and useability, Larry Kollar, 2002/08/30
Re: [Groff] troff syntax and useability, Peter Schaffter, 2002/08/30
Re: [Groff] troff syntax and useability, Larry Kollar, 2002/08/29