On Tue, 12 Mar 2002, Jamie Honan wrote:

> On Mon, Mar 11, 2002 at 01:40:36PM +0000, Rev Simon Rumble wrote:
> > On Mon 11 Mar, [EMAIL PROTECTED] bloviated thus:
> >
> > > Eh?  I use it all the time.  Unless you mean, "use groff instead"?  I
> > > have to agree, that I think nowadays the groff version of troff is
> > > better than the original, as of about last year.
> >
> > No, don't use troff or groff.  There are _FAR_ better ways to lay out
> > a document that don't have you learning incredibly obscure commands
> > and syntax.  Troff has had its day.
>
> I have to disagree.
>
> > > it's almost fast enough to do interactively.
> >
> > My point precisely.  Use something that _IS_ interactive, or at least
> > something that is a bit easier to learn.
>
> I find there are lots of situations where the simplest and/or fastest
> way is to use groff. That includes any learning.
>
> There are also lots of situations where it isn't. This would include
> interactive and non-interactive usage.
>
> Groff is not a shrine, an homage to the good old days. It is not a
> case of bit rot, waiting for release from collective computer memories.
>
> It remains, under certain circumstances, an optimum solution in a
> trade-off between size, learning curve, usability, functionality and speed.
>
> That it reamins so is a tribute to the original minds behind it.

Yeah!.. We create all our purchase orders with Groff!.. It rocks
especially with Tables and -ms macros..

The only gripe, is the lack of documentation... I had to resort to
filching the man pages from an old SyS-V machine on some of the more
obscure aspects (like tables) of groff and it's macros.

-- 
Anthony Rumble - Managing Director
EverythingLinux.com.au - The Alternative Operating System Store
LinuxHelp.com.au - Support,Training,Development,Consulting
Phone: 0500 500 368 Direct 02-9712-1799 Fax 02-9712-3977

-- 
SLUG - Sydney Linux User Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug

Reply via email to