On 2017-04-15 11:27 AM, Clem Cole wrote:
>
> ...
> Anyway - it fine to say you don't like troff - please feel free to
> suggest that you don't think that it can be made to your
> style/preferences.   But please don't sling to many insults as the truth
> is, that troff is still useful to many people and a lot people do still
> like it.

I'm not saying I "don't like troff". I don't care what anyone uses.

>
> In my own case, I'll use TeX if a colleague wants too, but I'm a fair
> bit faster with troff than almost any other doc prep system for any
> document of almost any size; but particularly when the documents get
> large such as book.   But that's me; although I note it is also a lot of
> other people.   As Brian points out, many of the Pearson and Wiley texts
> use troff; and of course you have to note that my old deskmate, Tim

...and of course I know books have been set with troff. That's 
irrelevant to the point I was making: Tools of different generations, 
with different provenance, ambitions, designs, and capabilities. I hope 
no confusion remains.

--T

> O'Reilly founded his empire on it 😂 (I still have a copy of the his
> original style manual they wrote for the Masscomp engineers and doc
> writers in the mid 80s).
> Clem