Re: [Groff] Re: Resource forks in OSX__Wrapping up

[Alejandro López-Valencia]

Ralph Corderoy wrote:
> Hi,
>
>>> There is one thing I don't have clear just yet. Shouldn't \N'xxx'
>>> accept octal and hex numbers too?
>>
>> Rats! I am blind! It certainly does. Then why didn't work the first
>> five times I tried? I have big bone to chew on...
>
> I didn't think it accepted octal either.
>
>     $ echo '\N"65"\N"101"\N"0101"x'| groff -Tascii|cat -s
>     Aeex
>
> Perhaps it's changed in a recent version and you're mixing versions?

Hmm... I'm using last weekend snapshot. I think there is an
inconsistency in either the manual or troff, in section 8.2.2 of the
manual it is stated:

"""
The code field gives the code which the postprocessor uses to print the
glyph. The glyph can also be input to gtroff using this code by means of
the \N escape sequence. code can be any integer. If it starts with '0'
it is interpreted as octal; if it starts with '0x' or '0X' it is
interpreted as hexadecimal.
"""

Yet,

$ echo '\N"0x64"'| groff -Tascii|cat -s

results in

<standard input>:1: warning: can't find numbered character 0
64"

If printing to a file the result is

    ^64'

not d as I would expect.