Re: [Groff] Re: Blank line macro (.blm) evil with `groff -ms'

2007-07-02 Thread Werner LEMBERG 
 Since this hasn't been observed until now, it would appear that the
 OP is trying to achieve something rather unusual.  As [EMAIL PROTECTED]'
 needs to be invoked in environment 0, perhaps a warning could be
 emitted if the environment has been changed before initialisation
 occurs?

Good idea!  Applied, thanks.


Werner


___
bug-groff mailing list
bug-groff@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-groff

Re: Blank line macro (.blm) evil with `groff -ms'

2007-06-30 Thread Werner LEMBERG 

 I would like to report a problem with groff compilation when the
 blank line macro request (.blm) is used.  [...]

Your analysis is wrong.  The problem is completely unrelated to the
blank line macro.  It is possible to reduce your example to this:

  .ev 1
  .br
  .ev
  .LP
  x

The call to `.br' invokes groff's output routine.  This in turn
invokes the [EMAIL PROTECTED]' macro which is called only once in the whole
document.  Its function is to initialize the global state of the
various ms macros, and it assumes that it is in environment 0 (the
top-level environment).  In the given example, the assumption fails,
and environment 0 isn't initialized correctly.

I'm not sure whether I should classify the current behaviour as a bug
or as a feature.  I tend to say it's a feature, and I would like to
document that the first action which causes vertical movement in the
output must happen in the top-level environment.  Anything else makes
the initialization unreliable IMHO.

Comments, please.


Werner


___
bug-groff mailing list
bug-groff@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-groff