Re: .Fn _* issue

[Jason McIntyre <jmc@kerhand.co.uk>]

On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 05:45:21PM +0200, Kristaps Dzonsons wrote:
> >>> so the issue is the initial `_' in _flush_cache. it's formatted in a
> >>> different font to the rest of the function name (you can see this best
> >>> on a terminal).
> >>>
> >>> this is a long standing bug that we always had in old groff, which
> >>> really annoyed me. new groff fixed it.
> >> Jason, I'm not sure I follow as mandoc, new groff, and old groff all
> >> seem to do the same thing with the _flush_cache beginning:
> >>
> >>   GNU nroff (groff) version 1.18.1
> >>   nroff -mandoc foo.1 | hexdump -c
> >>   _  \b   _   f  \b   f   l  \b   l   u  \b
> >>
> >>   mandoc foo.1 | hexdump -c
> >>   _  \b   _   f  \b   f   l  \b   l   u  \b
> >>
> >>   GNU troff version 1.15
> >>   nroff -mandoc foo.1 | hexdump -c
> >>   _  \b   _   f  \b   f   l  \b   l   u  \b
> >>
> >>
> > 
> > hmm, and you do not see the issue i describe? what else could it be?
> > surely not my TERM setting if mandoc shows it one way and groff another.
> > 
> > what else?
> 
> Jason,
> 
> It could be groff acting upon TERM.  When I run this under a linux
> terminal, for example, the underscores are colourised like the `Fa'
> token (i.e., "underlined").  Do note that "_ \b _" is ambiguous: it
> could either mean an underlined underscore or a bold underscore.
> 
> (I ran the above in TERM=rxvt.)
> 

hmm. i use TERM=wsvt25. so do you think there is a bug in the term code,
or it's something else?

jmc
--
 To unsubscribe send an email to discuss+unsubscribe@mdocml.bsd.lv