Follow-up Comment #12, bug #67380 (group groff): [comment #11 comment #11:] > I think it strengthens the case for a GNU _troff_ extension to > the `fl` request that makes it argumentful,
Ah, yes, if you're considering only expanded syntax that introduces new
behavior, I have no objection: that breaks no (valid) existing usage. I read
the last paragraph of comment #8 as a proposal to change the behavior of an
unadorned .fl.
_______________________________________________________
Reply to this item at:
<https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?67380>
_______________________________________________
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.gnu.org/
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
