Re: [Groff] bug in GNU troff?

[Werner LEMBERG]

[about tabs and partial lines]

> That doesn't matter.  groff was meant to be "a complete, open
> source implementation of the standard Unix typesetting system" -- James
> Clark.

In compatibility mode, yes.  But, sorry if I say so, this particular
behaviour of UNIX troff is (at least for me) neither intuitive nor
very useful -- I'm really interested to see a practical application.

> There's a danger of trying to coerce groff to what you think troff
> should have been.

Which danger?  Please elaborate.  Since the very moment of introducing
long names, groff is no longer compatible with UNIX troff.

I don't want to be a guard of a museum.


     Werner