[bug #64772] [hdtbl] consider deprecating

Follow-up Comment #12, bug#64772 (group groff): [comment #9 comment #9:] > I will have a shot at this. Thanks for volunteering! > The current difference between my branch > and that of master is in the attachments. > > Most of it is an addition to the bugs #54538, #54539, > #55007, #55027,

[bug #64772] [hdtbl] consider deprecating

Follow-up Comment #11, bug#64772 (group groff): Well, [https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/groff/2023-12/msg7.html _somebody_ is still using hdtbl]... ___ Reply to this item at:

[bug #64772] [hdtbl] consider deprecating

Follow-up Comment #10, bug #64772 (project groff): [comment #4 comment #4:] > What will then replace the "fonts_n.ps" and "fonts_x.ps" files, > which show all the characters in the fonts provided by groff? These files being buried in contrib/hdtbl/examples means users looking for examples of

[bug #64772] [hdtbl] consider deprecating

Follow-up Comment #9, bug #64772 (project groff): I will have a shot at this. The current difference between my branch and that of master is in the attachments. Most of it is an addition to the bugs #54538, #54539, #55007, #55027, #55044, and #55732. What remains to do is using the

[bug #64772] [hdtbl] consider deprecating

Follow-up Comment #8, bug #64772 (project groff): hdtbl has proven useful at catching bad builds in the past, so I feel it continues to have some utility (though its man page annoys me as much as its code annoys Ingo). I don't feel much personal motivation to do anything about hdtbl. If someone

[bug #64772] [hdtbl] consider deprecating

Follow-up Comment #7, bug #64772 (project groff): > I think calling code review "speculative" in this context - as > if systematic testing were somehow better - is not helpful. Fair point. I chose that term based more on your wording "I have little doubt that it is full of bugs," which to my

[bug #64772] [hdtbl] consider deprecating

Follow-up Comment #6, bug #64772 (project groff): [comment #5 comment #5:] > which implies his previously quoted characterization of the package as "buggy as hell" is speculative based on code inspection, rather than empirical based on testing. Note that code review and black-box testing are

[bug #64772] [hdtbl] consider deprecating

Follow-up Comment #5, bug #64772 (project groff): Some history: The author of the HDtbl macros, Joachim Walsdorff, presented them to the email list in http://lists.gnu.org/r/groff/2005-12/msg3.html (at a now-defunct URL). The package was first bundled with groff in groff 1.20 (announced at

[bug #64772] [hdtbl] consider deprecating

Follow-up Comment #4, bug #64772 (project groff): Deprecated means in my dictionary "undesirable". When declared deprecated, users should stop using it and use another (newly added) feature (command) instead. The next step is declaring it obsolete. I added diagnostic options (-ww -b) to

[bug #64772] [hdtbl] consider deprecating

Follow-up Comment #3, bug #64772 (project groff): [comment #2 comment #2:] > Are you generating Heidelberger tables for your own work, or merely > running basic tests against the package because it's part of groff? Clarification: the "merely" isn't meant to dismiss the value of such testing, but

[bug #64772] [hdtbl] consider deprecating

Follow-up Comment #2, bug #64772 (project groff): [comment #1 comment #1:] > I see no need to abandon "hdtbl". The proposal to deprecate it means it should exist in the next n releases of groff with notice that it's deprecated. It's unclear how much use it gets, as every reported bug against

[bug #64772] [hdtbl] consider deprecating

Follow-up Comment #1, bug #64772 (project groff): I see no need to abandon "hdtbl". The code produces the examples without an error, that I can see. "groff -ww" reported some warnings, which I have provided patches for (one has to be corrected). I have also adjusted some values of variables

[bug #64772] [hdtbl] consider deprecating

URL: Summary: [hdtbl] consider deprecating Group: GNU roff Submitter: barx Submitted: Fri 13 Oct 2023 02:08:15 AM CDT Category: Macro - others/general