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=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 18423 invoked from network); 13 Oct 2023 11:05:22 -0000 Received: from bsd.lv (HELO mandoc.bsd.lv) (66.111.2.12) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 13 Oct 2023 11:05:22 -0000 Received: from fantadrom.bsd.lv (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mandoc.bsd.lv (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id 770ab938 for ; Fri, 13 Oct 2023 11:05:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from scc-mailout-kit-01.scc.kit.edu (scc-mailout-kit-01.scc.kit.edu [129.13.231.81]) by mandoc.bsd.lv (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id d574e30f for ; Fri, 13 Oct 2023 11:05:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from hekate.asta.kit.edu ([2a00:1398:5:f401::77]) by scc-mailout-kit-01.scc.kit.edu with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_SECP256R1__RSA_PSS_RSAE_SHA256__AES_256_GCM:256) (envelope-from ) id 1qrFyq-00FPwR-1V; Fri, 13 Oct 2023 13:05:20 +0200 Received: from login-1.asta.kit.edu ([2a00:1398:5:f400::72]) by hekate.asta.kit.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1qrFyq-002N1e-3I; Fri, 13 Oct 2023 13:05:20 +0200 Received: from schwarze by login-1.asta.kit.edu with local (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1qrFyp-00Ej1d-SO; Fri, 13 Oct 2023 13:05:19 +0200 Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2023 13:05:19 +0200 From: Ingo Schwarze To: Baptiste Daroussin Cc: tech@mandoc.bsd.lv Subject: Re: Naive patch for handling empty input Message-ID: References: X-Mailinglist: mandoc-tech Reply-To: tech@mandoc.bsd.lv MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Hi Bapt, Baptiste Daroussin wrote on Fri, Oct 13, 2023 at 12:22:09PM +0200: > I was looking for compatibility with groff like you showed above, this > is an "issue" a user reported, he was expecting to have an empty output > if provided an empty input, but if the current behaviour is how you think > mandoc should behave, I am fine with closing the report with work as > intended. It might be useful to ask the user first *why* they want that particular behaviour, and how they think mandoc(1) should behave without .TH or .Dd in general, and why they want specific behaviour in such cases of degenerate input. It is conceivable that maybe they have an interesting reason, and knowing that reason might help to make mandoc better? I'm not sure it will, but i'm not sure that possibility can be excluded, either. Yours, Ingo -- To unsubscribe send an email to tech+unsubscribe@mandoc.bsd.lv