From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailout.scc.kit.edu (mailout.scc.kit.edu [129.13.185.202]) by krisdoz.my.domain (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q6TF6eWF011169 for ; Sun, 29 Jul 2012 11:06:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from hekate.usta.de (asta-nat.asta.uni-karlsruhe.de [172.22.63.82]) by scc-mailout-02.scc.kit.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.72 #1) id 1SvV4o-00028B-6e; Sun, 29 Jul 2012 17:06:38 +0200 Received: from donnerwolke.usta.de ([172.24.96.3]) by hekate.usta.de with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1SvV4o-0003c8-8O; Sun, 29 Jul 2012 17:06:38 +0200 Received: from iris.usta.de ([172.24.96.5] helo=usta.de) by donnerwolke.usta.de with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1SvV4o-000528-6x; Sun, 29 Jul 2012 17:06:38 +0200 Received: from schwarze by usta.de with local (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1SvV4o-0000zt-69; Sun, 29 Jul 2012 17:06:38 +0200 Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2012 17:06:38 +0200 From: Ingo Schwarze To: tech@mdocml.bsd.lv Cc: jmc@openbsd.org, millert@openbsd.org Subject: roff escaped space character Message-ID: <20120729150638.GC10723@iris.usta.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 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Hi Kristaps, on September 23, 2009, you have put the following descriptions into mandoc_char(7): .It \e~ Ta non-breaking, non-collapsing space .It \e Ta breaking, non-collapsing n-width space However, chars.in has this: CHAR(" ", ascii_nbrsp, 160) CHAR("~", ascii_nbrsp, 160) So the two are the same, which is correct behaviour for -Tascii. I have just added a few lines to http://www.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/regress/usr.bin/mandoc/char/space/nobreak.in showing that the code is indeed correct. So, groff actually handles "\\ " as non-breaking as well. Checking the current version of groff_char(7), i find this: 160 the ISO latin1 no-break space is mapped to `\~', the stretchable space character. However, i fail to find anything regarding "\\ ". Apparently, the difference is that "\\~" is stretchable, while "\\ " is fixed-width 1n? Do you still remember where you got the idea from that "\\ " is breaking (and 1n), or am i missing something? The following would have to be changed if it turns out that's actually a documentation error: * mandoc_char(7), subsection "Spaces": Part of that would have to be rewritten. * mandoc_char(7), SPECIAL CHARACTERS section: \ non-breaking, non-collapsing n-width space \~ non-breaking, non-collapsing strechable space * att.in, lib.in, st.in, mdoc_html.c, man_html.c: We might keep "\\~" there in case we ever implement variable width fonts in -Tps to get nicer spacing; or should we use "\\ " to give a better example regarding portability? I tend to leave that as it is. I tought i might ask first before spending time cooking up actual patches... Yours, Ingo -- To unsubscribe send an email to tech+unsubscribe@mdocml.bsd.lv