Re: [Groff] condition: OR of two string comparisons

[Carsten Kunze]

Steffen Nurpmeso <address@hidden> wrote:

> I personally don't like neither Carsten's N idea nor (X;).
> The former has the problem that a lot of letters are yet used,
> including lowercase n, meaning that there is no immediate visual
> indication that the expression is of an extended kind, so to say.

What precise problems to you see?

It is exactly my intention that there is no visual indication for that.

Many may have writen in the past things like

.if \\nA=1&(\\nB!=2) ...
.if \\nA=1&(!\\nB=2) ...
.if \\n(.$>1&"\\$1"-L" ...

and had been surprised that it doesn'd work.  This will be "fixed" then, that's 
it.  Of course--if that would not be compatible anymore this way is not 
feasible.  You and Ralph may be right regarding that but at the moment I can't 
imagine any problem.

Carsten