From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.4 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED, DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED,FREEMAIL_FROM,FSL_HELO_FAKE, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 16650 invoked from network); 28 Sep 2021 00:20:59 -0000 Received: from bsd.lv (HELO mandoc.bsd.lv) (66.111.2.12) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 28 Sep 2021 00:20:59 -0000 Received: from fantadrom.bsd.lv (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mandoc.bsd.lv (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id 45b1cddf for ; Mon, 27 Sep 2021 19:20:55 -0500 (EST) Received: from mail-wm1-f51.google.com (mail-wm1-f51.google.com [209.85.128.51]) by mandoc.bsd.lv (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id b4a5a971 for ; Mon, 27 Sep 2021 19:20:54 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-wm1-f51.google.com with SMTP id t16-20020a1c7710000000b003049690d882so552496wmi.5 for ; Mon, 27 Sep 2021 17:20:53 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:mime-version:content-disposition; bh=R6zPExuDNixLd19Z3F3F4qzN4cd56tfnf86fc6CsXCM=; b=IaRPD1tTJAeMkHPWJZkulOZB0nT2BKS3/hTKSr0Qdq2X7QXssjzzGEHg3ahpcBWsqE a/tJidQ8q1wb5zM6ZB4rLkh8SGJfQ5bpf0mV4slLv3opHq9TB5LlVxIPWztXT8SilE6i c3G51ijulLVgDn4sPcaenyy4ZMORtyIwp7Dmd9PAWtFDdAPC5SOg0XERb6C3b4oVpjJK EoljcZtccnCJDPYxgBMlTH5PbskMcBwpN9mbdYScMaRjbvPLzhwk1Ipo8eHmNPA/QvNS 3hAMcDcJiJJCjwhI53/ASjFHrBBwaZ5fce0QeBdNI5W+pm3QO97NmQwIor/5aDcq571F rBYw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:subject:message-id:mime-version :content-disposition; bh=R6zPExuDNixLd19Z3F3F4qzN4cd56tfnf86fc6CsXCM=; b=rycBuLwK1N5A3WiVm+QFCL4bxSpKgcndqQvRVCIHae3/gVjkZUN6uoyVRlXSSKKr+1 ap227jfy6AAKHUhsbUeoKYsXzWX5LD5f8fxDOMOgY9ki0R6VNGh3ivGhXouF4xkHxVkf KXHx1rqltRdFESBZxGaYrzeMI/enbjEH8rn21AoyvpKp74Y7guuozbNJ+Wk/bjUkAsid 8TkoFnCmbYpsmzr1YgIFojaBIs/3jNlz4jjDLjq6Gov16jCdQ/mMCTDU55KHJTbED/4Z HvOFBeY9ZBOBeVhObUKNQMXADH8Bvyfbjl07amKr07cQl4PKP7sQo0W3MMgoIdva3RJS +VoQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530jswqVbpiMpaNm9vRbF09kDJpWQj56g/jvsLyxDCAplPWOE+r5 1EE1KGXZk9f5hEeyNHFuGU0Q0ipKVi7CuQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxFsuiaRUks8LTiQs6TiRv39G+6V2LWl1WpAluLsxRvCCqIl/D0eTAlGTSa3Ji187dNt1ZBmw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:350f:: with SMTP id h15mr1798188wmq.123.1632788452807; Mon, 27 Sep 2021 17:20:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gmail.com (cpc92314-cmbg19-2-0-cust515.5-4.cable.virginm.net. [82.11.186.4]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h7sm9764729wrx.14.2021.09.27.17.20.52 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_CHACHA20_POLY1305_SHA256 bits=256/256); Mon, 27 Sep 2021 17:20:52 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2021 01:20:51 +0100 From: Raf Czlonka To: discuss@mandoc.bsd.lv Subject: Clarification needed in regards to "WARNING: blank line in fill mode, using .sp" Message-ID: X-Mailinglist: mandoc-discuss Reply-To: discuss@mandoc.bsd.lv MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Hello, While linting mdoc(7)-formatted manual pages, blank lines in them generate the below warning message: mandoc: foo.1:20:1: WARNING: blank line in fill mode, using .sp '.sp' is obviously a roff(7) request and the above, if not explicitly, does seem to suggest using it is the "proper" way to fix the manual page's formatting, at least implicitly. This seem to be contrary to what the mdoc(7) manual page says: Many aspects of the basic syntax of the mdoc language are based on the roff(7) language; see the LANGUAGE SYNTAX and MACRO SYNTAX sections in the roff(7) manual for details, in particular regarding comments, escape sequences, whitespace, and quoting. However, using roff(7) requests in mdoc documents is discouraged; mandoc(1) supports some of them merely for backward compatibility. I'm obviously talking about the "discouraged" here as there's no backward compatibility to speak of - as mentioned earlier, this is an mdoc(7)-formatted manual page. Given that '.sp' is nowhere to be found in mdoc(7) and is only present in roff(7), perhaps the warning should mention '.Pp' macro instead? Without knowing any of the above, one might simply take the warning at a face value and replace the blank line with roff(7)'s '.sp'. What do others think? What should the linter say in order to aid new authors in producing better-formatted mdoc(7) manual pages? Regards, Raf -- To unsubscribe send an email to discuss+unsubscribe@mandoc.bsd.lv