Re: Why does man(7) have 3 paragraph macros for the same thing? (was: `\c`, mdoc(7), and man(7) extension macros)

[Alejandro Colomar <alx@kernel.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2579 bytes --]

Hi Branden,

On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 10:28:13AM -0500, G. Branden Robinson wrote:
> At 2023-10-26T16:58:13+0200, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 09:51:40AM -0500, G. Branden Robinson wrote:
> > > At 2023-10-26T16:12:36+0200, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
> > > > Regarding PP, LP, and P, what's the history of them?  Why do we
> > > > have the 3?  I'm willing to reduce them to just one.
> > > 
> > > I invite Doug McIlroy to go on record, but my surmise is that they
> > > were introduced as crutches for people already familiar with ms(7).
> > > 
> > > Doug's original man(7) (1979) didn't have `P`.  But Unix System III
> > > added it in 1980, and 4.3BSD followed suit in 1986.  This
> > > information is in groff_man(7).
> > 
> > Was the original PP?
> 
> It had both `PP` and `LP`.  I reckon Doug figured ms(7) veterans would
> have an unreformable habit of typing one or the other.
> 
> https://minnie.tuhs.org/cgi-bin/utree.pl?file=V7/usr/man/man7/man.7
> 
> I'd have been sterner--and probably less fondly remembered by my peers.
> 
> (While I'm armchair quarterbacking Doug's plays of 45 years ago, oh, how
> I wish he hadn't have used input traps for anything in man(7).[1])
> 
> > Still, compatibility with ms(7) would make it slightly easier to
> > trasnfer learning from man(7) to ms(7), would one learn it.  I know
> > many other macros are incompatible in bad ways, but the less the
> > better, no?
> 
> That's true, but these days the knowledge transfer is, I submit, vastly
> more likely to go the other way; that is, people will be exposed to
> man(7) as their first roff macro language, and might decide to pick up
> ms(7).
> 
> At that point, they'd have to learn that `LP` and `PP` do _different_
> things.  I think it's actually better if they _don't_ have to unlearn
> the "fact" (applicable only to man(7)) that they are exactly the same.
> 
> Better, I believe, to promote only `P` in man(7).  Anyone wanting to
> pick up mm(7) will still enjoy some knowledge transfer.  Without
> arguments, `P` in mm(7) "does what you mean".

Yep; since PP is different in the languages, not using it here will be
better.  So, I'll soon s/PP/P/

Cheers,
Alex

> 
> (I will not elaborate here on what that means; see the groff_mm(7) man
> page in groff 1.23.0 and please God not an earlier version.)
> 
> Regards,
> Branden
> 
> [1] In practice, nearly no one took them up for any purpose except the
>     one place you _had_ to use them: `TP`.



-- 
<https://www.alejandro-colomar.es/>

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]