Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!ico!vail!rcd
From: rcd@ico.ISC.COM (Dick Dunn)
Newsgroups: comp.text
Subject: Re: Troff Macro Programming A: Part 1 [repost]
Summary: one more try
Keywords: sqtroff ditroff troff DWB
Message-ID: <15801@vail.ICO.ISC.COM>
Date: 30 May 89 16:41:46 GMT
References: <18@nx32s.anduk.co.uk> <15768@vail.ICO.ISC.COM> <20@nx32s.anduk.co.uk> <1989May29.165203.17889@sq.com>
Distribution: comp
Organization: Interactive Systems Corp, Boulder, CO
Lines: 18

In article <1989May29.165203.17889@sq.com>, murray@sq.com (Murray Maloney) writes:
> I would like to comment on several of the points that have been raised.
. . .
> In fact, Mr Quin's notes apply to many versions of troff, including 
> common troff, ditroff, and nroff as well as UCB's Gremlin ditroff,
> Eroff, Xroff, profficient troff, PWB, DWB, DWB 2.0, and sqtroff.

I was referring to the long-name extensions, which are *not* in ditroff,
nroff, DWB, or DWB 2.0 as AT&T ships them.  I've tried them on programs
built directly from unmodified AT&T source.  I've also checked the source
code.  They just aren't there.

(What does PWB have to do with it?  I think I'm missing context here; I know
PWB as an old UNIX system, one of the two threads of development off V6
UNIX [the other being V7].)
-- 
Dick Dunn      UUCP: {ncar,nbires}!ico!rcd           (303)449-2870
   ...CAUTION:  I get mean when my blood-capsaicin level gets low.