Follow-up Comment #11, bug #67939 (group groff):

[comment #10 comment #10:]
> And I see why my ticket search failed.  I looked for _open_
> bugs matching "length".

That foiled me at first too.  Then I wondered if this might have been an email
thread that never got savannahed--but just try searching the email archives
for a specific discussion when the only keyword you have to go on is
"length."

> That's a reasonable enough expectation, and we could actually do that,
> but the `length` request is not specified in a manner supporting it.

I have questions about this, but it's wildly off topic for this ticket.
However, this issue does strike me as warranting a new ticket: Even if no
solution is yet clear--and even if the problem description isn't fully
baked--there's a legitimate issue (disconnect between user expectation and
code behavior) to document.  Then discussion for refining the problem
description and proposing solutions will have a forum better than a ticket
about an hdtbl test script.  In general, I feel it's better to open tickets
even if I expect them to be rejected, just so the problem can be considered,
and the reason for not making a change can go on record.  (I sometimes gaze
longingly at bug #55941 when I'm frustrated by the lack of a "test-nroff".)


    _______________________________________________________

Reply to this item at:

  <https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?67939>

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

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to