Path: utzoo!telly!eci386!ecicrl!clewis
From: clewis@ecicrl.UUCP (Chris Lewis)
Newsgroups: comp.text
Subject: Re: Groff
Message-ID: <936@ecicrl.UUCP>
Date: 16 Nov 90 16:16:51 GMT
References: <28619@shamash.cdc.com> <10354@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV> <1990Nov14.094039.11153@robobar.co.uk> <10375@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV>
Reply-To: clewis@ecicrl.UUCP (Chris Lewis)
Organization: Elegant Communications Inc., Ottawa, Canada
Lines: 22

In article <10375@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV> lwall@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV (Larry Wall) writes:
>In article <1990Nov14.094039.11153@robobar.co.uk> ronald@robobar.co.uk (Ronald S H Khoo) writes:
>: I'm not sure that groff is really ready for that kind of use yet.
>: Personally, I'm sticking to old troff (no, I lie, *ancient* troff :-)
>: with Chris Lewis's "psroff" package which translates the CAT output
>: to postscript, laserjet or ditroff output.  That package really is
>: production quality.

>But ancient troff still has the 3 1/2 font limit, which is the primary
>reason I wanted groff.  I don't suppose psroff has a way around that?

Do you mean 3 1/2 fonts maximum simultaneous or 3 1/2 fonts maximum
period?  Neither CAT troff or psroff have the 2nd limit, and I've never
had much trouble with the former.  Though, I suppose I could circumvent
it somehow.  DWB style troffs do have a more flexible method of adding
characters, but you can get around that limitation with old troff with
psroff.
-- 
Chris Lewis, Phone: TBA
UUCP: uunet!utai!lsuc!ecicrl!clewis
Moderator of the Ferret Mailing List (ferret-request@eci386)
Psroff mailing list (psroff-request@eci386)