Follow-up Comment #19, bug #58736 (project groff):
Bjarni's comment #12 patch (with correction from comment #14) does produce
correct output for the test cases in comment #0 and comment #11.
However, the new code appears to presume that there are only two columns,
whereas -me's .2c macro can begin any number of columns, two merely being the
default if no number is specified.
Indeed, the patched e.tmac fails in the three-column case:
A little introductory text.
.2c 4n 3
This text appears in the first column of multi-column output.
In this example, the first column is the longest.
.bc
This text appears in the second column of multi-column output.
.bc
This text appears in the third column of multi-column output.
.1c
Single-column output resumes.
In groff 1.22.4, this behaves as expected, producing for terminal output:
A little introductory text.
This text appears This text appears This text appears
in the first col- in the second in the third col-
umn of multi-col- column of multi- umn of multi-col-
umn output. In column output. umn output.
this example, the
first column is
the longest.
Single-column output resumes.
With the patch applied to the current code base, terminal output is:
A little introductory text.
This text appears This text appears This text appears
in the first col- in the second in the third col-
umn of multi-col- column of multi- umn of multi-col-
umn output. In column output. umn output.
Single-column output resumes.
first column is
the longest.
The logic Bjarni added to macro .1c does not easily scale to handle an
arbitrary number of columns.
Branden's dread from comment #4 was well justified.
_______________________________________________________
Reply to this item at:
<https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?58736>
_______________________________________________
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.gnu.org/
