From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp1.rz.uni-karlsruhe.de (Debian-exim@smtp1.rz.uni-karlsruhe.de [129.13.185.217]) by krisdoz.my.domain (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o9RKkGaD019487 for ; Wed, 27 Oct 2010 16:46:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from hekate.usta.de (asta-nat.asta.uni-karlsruhe.de [172.22.63.82]) by smtp1.rz.uni-karlsruhe.de with esmtp (Exim 4.63 #1) id 1PBCsv-0007K5-UI; Wed, 27 Oct 2010 22:46:14 +0200 Received: from donnerwolke.usta.de ([172.24.96.3]) by hekate.usta.de with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PBCsu-0003K9-CR for tech@mdocml.bsd.lv; Wed, 27 Oct 2010 22:46:12 +0200 Received: from iris.usta.de ([172.24.96.5] helo=usta.de) by donnerwolke.usta.de with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PBCsu-00005i-Bj for tech@mdocml.bsd.lv; Wed, 27 Oct 2010 22:46:12 +0200 Received: from schwarze by usta.de with local (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PBCsu-0004KX-3I for tech@mdocml.bsd.lv; Wed, 27 Oct 2010 22:46:12 +0200 Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2010 22:46:11 +0200 From: Ingo Schwarze To: tech@mdocml.bsd.lv Subject: Re: .IP without line args is not an ERROR Message-ID: <20101027204611.GK16057@iris.usta.de> References: <20101027102224.GB16057@iris.usta.de> <20101027124337.GA22794@britannica.bec.de> X-Mailinglist: mdocml-tech Reply-To: tech@mdocml.bsd.lv MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20101027124337.GA22794@britannica.bec.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Hi Joerg, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote on Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 02:43:37PM +0200: > On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 12:22:24PM +0200, Ingo Schwarze wrote: >> OK to commit this to bsd.lv, too? > Are you sure that the handling is correct? You mean, in man_term.c, (pre|post)_?P()? I have not systematically tested all the cases, but i have read the code, and it looks sane. Besides, there are comments indicating that Kristaps had this in mind when writing the code (e.g. in the definition of struct mtermp). I see no indication that anything might be broken in that respect. Those cases i looked at, work. Besides, that would be a wholly seperate issue. We are talking about removing a non-fatal error in the parser. The resulting AST has always been rendered in some way. Whether that rendering has issues has nothing to do with the validity of the input. > E.g. the "restore previous" behavior for missing arguments? Actually, in that respect, man(7) is different than mdoc(7). In mdoc, blocks can nest, but in man, if i understand correctly, each block terminates the previous block, at least among the *P blocks discussed here. Thus, the values in mtermp need no resetting at all, and those in termp just get reset to mt->offset and to the maximum right margin, no matter what the arguments of the block were. Yours, Ingo -- To unsubscribe send an email to tech+unsubscribe@mdocml.bsd.lv