Re: Markup inside verbatim blocks in POD (was Re: Reasons to not use quote signs directly?)

Guillem Jover writes: > While fiddling with this I stumbled over a behavior in Pod::Man that > gives exactly what I want, but it might be "undefined behavior" that > I should probably not be relying on? (I'd love to be wrong here :). > ,--- > =head1 NAME > verbatim - test verbatim formatted

Markup inside verbatim blocks in POD (was Re: Reasons to not use quote signs directly?)

Hi! Coming back to unearth this now that I'm looking again at converting the man pages to POD, and most of the hurdles except this one have been fixed in supporting tools or in the man pages. On Thu, 2016-10-27 at 16:58:38 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Guillem Jover writes: > > In

Re: Reasons to not use quote signs directly?

Guillem Jover writes: > Ah right, indeed it does. And it's explained in that same man page I > referred. O:) The escape sequence would be something like \[u0021] or > \[u0041_0300]. Oh! So, if I can just convert all Unicode characters to their numeric codes, this becomes

Re: Reasons to not use quote signs directly?

[ Colin CCed for some input on groff vs minus situation. ] On Thu, 2016-10-27 at 17:10:59 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Guillem Jover writes: > > For the current conversion in dpkg, I've taken most of the common > > symbols from groff_char(7) and created a very simple sed

Re: Reasons to not use quote signs directly?

Guillem Jover writes: > Yeah the Xs were really annoying. On the AIX and Mac OS X systems I > tested on, AFAIR they produced garbage when rendering, but I can recheck > to be sure. I think I might have also tested on a system that used man > (w/o Unicode support) instead of

Re: Reasons to not use quote signs directly?

Guillem Jover writes: > In deb-changelog(5) there is currently this: > ,--- > .nf > \fIpackage\fP (\fIversion\fP) \fIdistributions\fP; \fImetadata\fP > [optional blank line(s), stripped] > * \fIchange-details\fP > \fImore-change-details\fP > [blank

Re: Reasons to not use quote signs directly?

Hi! On Wed, 2016-10-19 at 12:54:10 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Guillem Jover writes: > > Using raw UTF-8 in the roff source is not portable, and some (most?) > > implementations might not be happy about that. But using the escape > > sequences should always be safe(?). (I've

Re: Reasons to not use quote signs directly?

Hi! On Wed, 2016-10-19 at 12:55:30 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Guillem Jover writes: > > Can use B(N) instead of L. Which might be needed anyway > > to reduce the amount of fuzzy strings. The same to using I<> instead > > of the more semantic F<>. > > I'd definitely

Re: Reasons to not use quote signs directly?

Guillem Jover writes: > Using raw UTF-8 in the roff source is not portable, and some (most?) > implementations might not be happy about that. But using the escape > sequences should always be safe(?). (I've just verified at least on AIX > and Mac OS X systems.)

Re: Reasons to not use quote signs directly?

Guillem Jover writes: > Can use B(N) instead of L. Which might be needed anyway > to reduce the amount of fuzzy strings. The same to using I<> instead > of the more semantic F<>. I'd definitely prefer to make L do the right thing instead, since it would be

Re: Reasons to not use quote signs directly?

Hello Guillem, On Thu, Oct 06, 2016 at 11:24:22PM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > On Sun, 2016-09-25 at 16:46:58 +0200, Helge Kreutzmann wrote: > > On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 04:21:31PM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > > > On Wed, 2016-09-21 at 01:59:10 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > > > > But I've found

Re: Reasons to not use quote signs directly?

Hi! On Sun, 2016-09-25 at 16:46:58 +0200, Helge Kreutzmann wrote: > On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 04:21:31PM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > > On Wed, 2016-09-21 at 01:59:10 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > > > But I've found some quirks and issues that while not unsurmountable, > > > might need to be

Re: Reasons to not use quote signs directly?

Hello Guillem, On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 04:21:31PM +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > On Wed, 2016-09-21 at 01:59:10 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote: > > But I've found some quirks and issues that while not unsurmountable, > > might need to be looked at first and perhaps fixed or workarounds found > > to

Re: Reasons to not use quote signs directly?

[ Russ (CCed), please see below for some inquiries about pod2man. ] Hi! On Mon, 2016-09-19 at 18:30:49 +0200, Helge Kreutzmann wrote: > the dpkg man pages were converted during the recent months from direct > quote signs to groff marcros for the quote signs. Right, this was done for multiple

Reasons to not use quote signs directly?

Hello Guillem et al, the dpkg man pages were converted during the recent months from direct quote signs to groff marcros for the quote signs. I finally managed to look them up and to think about their German equivalent (i.e. to construct a mapping which I can use for translation). When we