[bug #59442] [PATCH] groff.cpp: move soelim before preconv in constructed pipeline

Follow-up Comment #11, bug #59442 (group groff): It sounds like a decision is needed on which is the cart and which the horse. Should this bug take priority -- as comment #1 points out, "The whole point of soelim is to get preprocessors to run on `.so`ed files" -- and then bug #65108 has to

[bug #59442] [PATCH] groff.cpp: move soelim before preconv in constructed pipeline

Follow-up Comment #10, bug #59442 (group groff): Sorry, I did read comment #5 before posting but missed the implication of its effect on the soelim proposal. ___ Reply to this item at:

[bug #59442] [PATCH] groff.cpp: move soelim before preconv in constructed pipeline

Follow-up Comment #9, bug #59442 (group groff): Oh, what I said in comment #8 isn't news at all, given comment #5 and comment #6. Might help if I scrolled down and read sometimes before replying... ___ Reply to this item at:

[bug #59442] [PATCH] groff.cpp: move soelim before preconv in constructed pipeline

Follow-up Comment #8, bug #59442 (group groff): Thanks, Dave. It did occur to me at one point that this change might interfere with one of the deeper linguistic reforms I'm considering to the formatter, like bug #65108. But I've forgotten my reasoning and didn't write it down.

[bug #59442] [PATCH] groff.cpp: move soelim before preconv in constructed pipeline

Update of bug #59442 (group groff): Status: Need Info => None ___ Follow-up Comment #7: This was made "Need Info" when Branden asked "Can anyone else think of any objections?" As none

[bug #59442] [PATCH] groff.cpp: move soelim before preconv in constructed pipeline

Follow-up Comment #6, bug#59442 (group groff): [comment #5 comment #5:] > It occurs to me that I hadn't actually written up this idea with these > particulars before. This should probably be a new ticket. Now bug #65108. ___ Reply to

[bug #59442] [PATCH] groff.cpp: move soelim before preconv in constructed pipeline

Update of bug#59442 (group groff): Summary: [PATCH] groff.cpp: move soelim before preconv in constructed pipeline => [PATCH] groff.cpp: move soelim before preconv in constructed pipeline ___ Follow-up Comment #5:

[bug #59442] [PATCH] groff.cpp: move soelim before preconv in constructed pipeline

Follow-up Comment #4, bug#59442 (group groff): [comment #1 comment #1:] > 1. What happens if a .so(urced) file has a non-ASCII character > in its filename? This seems more likely to work with the proposed change than without it. Currently, with preconv preceding soelim, preconv will change the

[bug #59442] [PATCH] groff.cpp: move soelim before preconv in constructed pipeline

Follow-up Comment #3, bug #59442 (project groff): [comment #2 comment #2:] > this may indeed be worth considering, but after release, not before. That time has arrived! The patch as posted still applies fine (even despite the "verbatim" tags being malformed, which can sometimes cause problems),

[bug #59442] [PATCH] groff.cpp: move soelim before preconv in constructed pipeline

Update of bug #59442 (project groff): Category:Preprocessor preconv => General Severity: 3 - Normal => 1 - Wish ___ Reply to this item at:

[bug #59442] [PATCH] groff.cpp: move soelim before preconv in constructed pipeline

Update of bug #59442 (project groff): Category:Core => Preprocessor preconv Item Group: Incorrect behaviour => New feature ___ Follow-up Comment #2: Quick answer without

[bug #59442] [PATCH] groff.cpp: move soelim before preconv in constructed pipeline

Update of bug #59442 (project groff): Summary: [PATCH] groff.cpp: correct the order of preprocessors in the pipeline => [PATCH] groff.cpp: move soelim before preconv in constructed pipeline ___ Reply to this item at: