Re: [Groff] strings on successive lines bug?

[Werner LEMBERG]

> There seems to be a bug in the way strings on consecutive lines are
> expanded.

No, this is correct behaviour.

> Here is an example file.
> 
> .ds one 1
> .ds two 2
> .one
> .two

While macros, diversions, and strings are basically the same in groff,
there actually *are* differences.  The last character of a macro (and
a diversion) definition is always a newline, whereas a string doesn't
contain a newline at all -- otherwise \*[...] wouldn't work as
expected.

> Only the first string, .one, gets translated.  So
> output looks like
> 
> 1.two

The newline character after `1' is used to terminate the string called
as a macro.

Does original troff behave differently?  I don't think so.


    Werner