First attempt truncated, try this. :-(
On Friday, 9 June 2023 17:04:56 BST G. Branden Robinson wrote:
> Hi Deri,
>
> At 2023-06-09T12:26:00+0100, Deri wrote:
> > On Thursday, 8 June 2023 23:33:25 BST G. Branden Robinson wrote:
> > > It was there until literally days ago. It seemed like such a
[self-follow-up]
At 2023-06-09T11:04:59-0500, G. Branden Robinson wrote:
> I'm attaching the bundle of diffs that comprise this change and some
> refactoring preliminaries. Maybe you can tell me if my test approach
> was inadequate for PostScript?
As so often happens, I forgot the attachment.
On Friday, 9 June 2023 17:04:56 BST G. Branden Robinson wrote:
> Hi Deri,
>
> At 2023-06-09T12:26:00+0100, Deri wrote:
> > On Thursday, 8 June 2023 23:33:25 BST G. Branden Robinson wrote:
> > > It was there until literally days ago. It seemed like such a subtle
> > > point that I thought I might
Hi Deri,
At 2023-06-09T12:26:00+0100, Deri wrote:
> On Thursday, 8 June 2023 23:33:25 BST G. Branden Robinson wrote:
> > It was there until literally days ago. It seemed like such a subtle
> > point that I thought I might get a Savannah ticket open against it
> > and maybe even fixed for
At 2023-06-09T22:15:41+1000, Damian McGuckin wrote:
> Also remember that
>
> left {
> right }
>
> removes the special meaning from the braces, i.e. as a way to group
> multiple things into what can then be treated as a single thing. In
> that context, those braces are also then no
On Thursday, 8 June 2023 23:33:25 BST G. Branden Robinson wrote:
> It was there until literally days ago. It seemed like such a subtle
> point that I thought I might get a Savannah ticket open against it and
> maybe even fixed for groff-next before anyone noticed. Sorry. :(
Be careful
> On Jun 9, 2023, at 5:01 AM, Damian McGuckin wrote:
>
> On Fri, 9 Jun 2023, G. Branden Robinson wrote:
>
>>> How should I define 'thing' before I start talking about it?
>>
>> My solution (of recent vintage) in eqn(1) has been to leave our CS
>> brains exposed and use the word "token".
>
>
Hi Richard,
On Fri, 9 Jun 2023, Richard Morse wrote:
On Jun 9, 2023, at 5:01 AM, Damian McGuckin wrote:
On Fri, 9 Jun 2023, G. Branden Robinson wrote:
How should I define 'thing' before I start talking about it?
My solution (of recent vintage) in eqn(1) has been to leave our CS
brains
On Fri, 9 Jun 2023, G. Branden Robinson wrote:
(x sup 2)
The 2) is NOT a thing. It is two separate things where there is a
missing seperator because of a user error.
Right.
Thanks. I hope I get it right after 40 years!
How should I define 'thing' before I start talking about it?
At 2023-06-09T02:02:48-0400, Peter Schaffter wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 08, 2023, G. Branden Robinson wrote:
> > At 2023-06-08T18:19:39-0400, Steve Izma wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jun 06, 2023 at 03:07:07PM -0500, G. Branden Robinson wrote:
> > > I'm pretty sure this anomaly has been discussed on the groff
Hi Damian,
At 2023-06-09T18:00:26+1000, Damian McGuckin wrote:
> In the original 'eqn' Users Guide, the word 'thing' is used to refer,
> I believe, to any sequence of characters that does not include a
> separator (blank, newline, '~', '^', '{' or '}' ) or punctuation or
> mathematical symbol. It
In the original 'eqn' Users Guide, the word 'thing' is used to refer, I
believe, to any sequence of characters that does not include a separator
(blank, newline, '~', '^', '{' or '}' ) or punctuation or mathematical
symbol. It can also mean a sequence of characters that incorrectly does
not
On Thu, Jun 08, 2023, G. Branden Robinson wrote:
> At 2023-06-08T18:19:39-0400, Steve Izma wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 06, 2023 at 03:07:07PM -0500, G. Branden Robinson wrote:
> > I'm pretty sure this anomaly has been discussed on the groff list
> > before, but I don't know of any explanation in the
13 matches
Mail list logo
