Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > gnu.groff.bug > #1990 > unrolled thread

[bug #58995] doc/groff.texi: macro and diversion documentation should mention shared name space

Started byDave <INVALID.NOREPLY@gnu.org>
First post2020-08-22 08:16 -0400
Last post2020-08-22 08:16 -0400
Articles 1 — 1 participant

Back to article view | Back to gnu.groff.bug

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.


Contents

  [bug #58995] doc/groff.texi: macro and diversion documentation should mention shared name space Dave <INVALID.NOREPLY@gnu.org> - 2020-08-22 08:16 -0400

#1990 — [bug #58995] doc/groff.texi: macro and diversion documentation should mention shared name space

FromDave <INVALID.NOREPLY@gnu.org>
Date2020-08-22 08:16 -0400
Subject[bug #58995] doc/groff.texi: macro and diversion documentation should mention shared name space
Message-ID<mailman.735.1598098613.2469.bug-groff@gnu.org>
URL:
  <https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?58995>

                 Summary: doc/groff.texi: macro and diversion documentation
should mention shared name space
                 Project: GNU troff
            Submitted by: barx
            Submitted on: Sat 22 Aug 2020 07:16:48 AM CDT
                Category: Core
                Severity: 3 - Normal
              Item Group: Documentation
                  Status: None
                 Privacy: Public
             Assigned to: None
             Open/Closed: Open
         Discussion Lock: Any
         Planned Release: None

    _______________________________________________________

Details:

Macros, strings, and diversions share the same name space.  The info document
points this out in its "Identifiers" section and in its "Strings" section. 
But the "Writing Macros" section and the "Diversions" section do not mention
it, which has led to confusion
(http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/groff/2014-11/msg00293.html).  These two
sections should mention the fact, with a cross-reference to one of the fuller
discussions about it.




    _______________________________________________________

Reply to this item at:

  <https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?58995>

_______________________________________________
  Message sent via Savannah
  https://savannah.gnu.org/

[toc] | [standalone]


Back to top | Article view | gnu.groff.bug


csiph-web