Follow-up Comment #34, bug #66919 (group groff):

Hi Dave,

At 2025-05-02T20:48:57-0400, Dave wrote:
> Follow-up Comment #33, bug #66919 (group groff):
>
> More later, but this part is easy:
>
> [comment #32 comment #32:]
>> Again I have lost track of your definition of reflexivity here,
>
> I defined it at the end of comment #4.  (If comments are ordered
> earliest-to-latest, it's the first use of the term "reflexive" that
> comes up in this ticket.)

Yes, and it may be my fault that we're using it at all, as it may have
been I who dragged the discrete math syllabus into this mega-thread.

> The term is my way to distinguish between the two distinct things
> .hcode does.
> * ".hcode a a" (for any a) "creates" a previously unused hyphenation
> code for character a.
> * ".hcode a b" (for any a != b) sets the hyphenation code of character
> a to that of character b.

I can readily endorse this definition, _but_ I think doing so only
highlights our clashing understandings elsewhere.

Ordinary characters are not special characters and indexed characters
are neither.  All are distinct kinds of object, both in the lay sense
and in the C++ implementation.

Consequently,


.hcode \[~o] รต


cannot *ever* be a reflexive hyphenation code assignment, no matter what
hyphenation code values are in play.  A novice, given your definition of
"reflexive", would say that that's obvious from inspection.  I think we
should strive not to overturn that intuition.

> I termed the former syntax "reflexive" by analogy with the
> mathematical reflexive property.  But I have no attachment to this
> term, so I'm happy to change to a better one.  It's just something
> (like "non-copy mode") that needed a name for the sake of discussion,
> so I assigned it one.

Fair.  My present hypothesis is that my immediately previous observation
is where we are clashing.  But I could be mistaken.



    _______________________________________________________

Reply to this item at:

  <https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?66919>

_______________________________________________
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.gnu.org/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to