Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!jarthur!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ncar!gatech!mcnc!uvaarpa!murdoch!news
From: randall@Virginia.EDU (Ran Atkinson)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.programmer
Subject: Re: NROFF for PC
Message-ID: <1990Dec10.223321.2738@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>
Date: 10 Dec 90 22:33:21 GMT
References: <1990Dec7.000432.6440@magnus.ircc.ohio-state.edu> <1990Dec7.154008.9373@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> <1990Dec10.191405.6058@ioe.lon.ac.uk>
Sender: news@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU
Reply-To: Ran Atkinson <randall@Virginia.EDU>
Followup-To: comp.os.msdos.programmer
Organization: University of Virginia
Lines: 27

In article <1990Dec10.191405.6058@ioe.lon.ac.uk> teexnma@ioe.lon.ac.uk (Nino Margetic) writes:

>Best to my knowledge, the original AWF (Amazingly Workable Formater)
>DID NOT WORK on the 16 bit machines, ie under MSDOS. However, I do
>remeber that someone claimed to have ported it to MSDOS... Since I
>myself am also interested in a nroff(ish) beastie, could someone
>confirm this??

Since AWF is written in the Awk Language, whether the AWF works should
depend on whether your Awk interpreter works properly, not on your OS
or hardware.

I suspect that older versions of GAWK, which had problems which are
fixed in more recent ones, might have had problems -- not just on
MSDOS but all systems.  In short, I question whether it was an AWF
problem rather than a problem with some people's older versions of
GAWK for MSDOS.  I personally use MKS Awk and have seen no problems.

If anyone has run into problems that are due to AWF and not due to an
erroneous or incomplete version of the Awk language, I'd be interested
in hearing about them and the author of AWF probably would be too...

Ran
randall@Virginia.EDU

Disclaimer: I just use AWF, I had nothing to do with its development or
            distribution... :-)