Re: table borders don't span entire width

[Ingo Schwarze <schwarze@usta.de>]

Hi,

Ingo Schwarze wrote on Fri, Feb 08, 2019 at 11:02:21PM +0100:
> Anthony J. Bentley wrote on Fri, Feb 08, 2019 at 02:43:45PM -0700:

>> Side note: while using = for the double line is an improvement over
>> groff, in UTF-8 the double line is output with U+2501. Wouldn't U+2550
>> be more appropriate? The typeset output displays a double line, not a
>> heavy line.

> I think i did that because the heavy lines looked better to me,
> but it's not the first time someone asks, so maybe i should change it.
> Adjusting borders_utf8[] in tbl_term.c is probably all that is needed.

Oops, it is not that simple.  Box drawing with double lines is simply
incomplete in Unicode.  I wouldn't have thought it possible that
Unicode is actually missing characters...   :-o

I deleted all entries containing heavy lines from the table
and inserted all characters containing double lines that i was
able to find, and here is what i got:

static  const int borders_utf8[81] = {
        0x0020, 0x2576, 0x    ,  /* 000 right */
        0x2577, 0x250c, 0x2552,  /* 001 down */
        0x    , 0x2553, 0x2554,  /* 002 */
        0x2574, 0x2500, 0x    ,  /* 010 left */
        0x2510, 0x252c, 0x    ,  /* 011 left down */
        0x2556, 0x2565, 0x    ,  /* 012 */
        0x    , 0x    , 0x2550,  /* 020 left */
        0x2555, 0x    , 0x2564,  /* 021 left down */
        0x2557, 0x    , 0x2566,  /* 022 */
        0x2575, 0x2514, 0x2558,  /* 100 up */
        0x2502, 0x251c, 0x255e,  /* 101 up down */
        0x    , 0x    , 0x    ,  /* 102 */
        0x2518, 0x2534, 0x    ,  /* 110 up left */
        0x2524, 0x253c, 0x    ,  /* 111 all */
        0x    , 0x    , 0x    ,  /* 112 */
        0x255b, 0x    , 0x2567,  /* 120 up left */
        0x2561, 0x    , 0x256a,  /* 121 all */
        0x    , 0x    , 0x    ,  /* 122 */
        0x    , 0x2559, 0x255a,  /* 200 up */
        0x    , 0x    , 0x    ,  /* 201 up down */
        0x2551, 0x255f, 0x2560,  /* 202 */
        0x255c, 0x2568, 0x    ,  /* 210 up left */
        0x    , 0x    , 0x    ,  /* 211 all */
        0x2562, 0x256b, 0x    ,  /* 212 */
        0x255d, 0x    , 0x2569,  /* 220 up left */
        0x    , 0x    , 0x    ,  /* 221 all */
        0x2563, 0x    , 0x256c,  /* 222 */
};

So in particular, the following are missing:

 * double right
 * double down
 * single left with double right
 * single left down with double right
 * single left with double right down
 * double left
 * double left with single right
 * double left with single right down
 * double left down with single right

and so on...

With heavy instead of double, such combinations exist.

So, should i leave this untouched, or am i missing something?

Yours,
  Ingo
--
 To unsubscribe send an email to tech+unsubscribe@mandoc.bsd.lv