Re: Inter-paragraph separation modified by HP

[Alejandro Colomar]

Hi Branden,

On 4/29/23 21:16, G. Branden Robinson wrote:
> Hi Alex,
> 
> At 2023-04-29T21:02:52+0200, Alejandro Colomar wrote:
>> I was checking some warning about using HP.  It happens in uri.7.
>>
>> I'm not sure I understand the macro.  From visual inspection, it's
>> creating inter-paragraph spacing, but from the documentation I'd
>> say it should only affect horizontal space, right?
> 
> The purpose of the macro is to create a hanging indent.  To illustrate,
>      I'll format this very paragraph with a hanging indentation.  You
>      can see that lines after the first are indented, but the first is
>      not.  But it is still a paragraph, so inter-paragraph space
>      precedes it.
> 
>> It's being called as '.HP 0.2i'.  I replaced those .HP calls by .PP
>> to see the difference, and I don't see anything noticeable in
>> horizontal spacing, but see a considerable difference in the
>> vertical spacing.
> 
> I'm not seeing a difference in vertical space among the 3 PDF exhibits.

Indeed; it seems I sent the wrong files.  I'll copy here what I did now.


$ <man7/uri.7 /usr/local/bin/groff -man -Tpdf >uri.HP.new.pdf
$ <man7/uri.7 /usr/bin/groff       -man -Tpdf >uri.HP.old.pdf
$ <man7/uri.7 sed '/HP/c\.PP' | /usr/local/bin/groff -man -Tpdf >uri.PP.new.pdf
$ <man7/uri.7 sed '/HP/c\.PP' | /usr/bin/groff       -man -Tpdf >uri.PP.old.pdf


I hope I didn't goof it now.

> 
> Each BNF declaration gets a paragraph.  The break for "scheme" happens
> way too early, but that too is consistent among the 3 PDF exhibits.

Here's what I see:

In the HP.old and PP.old, the only difference is the continuation line,
which is better aligned when using HP.  (I could improve this using SY.)

PP.new and PP.old are identical, as expected.

HP.new has extra inter-paragraph space.


> 
>> It's used in the synopsis; it should be easy to distinguish.
>>
>> Is that some 1.23.0 regression maybe?
>>
>> In fact, after formatting with /usr/bin/groff (the old 1.22.4), I
>> don't see the effects of 1.23.0, so it's a regression.  Is it known?
> 
> Could you maybe take a screenshot and mark up the thing I'm supposed to
> be seeing with a big red arrow or something?

Since it was simply that I probably sent wrong files, I won't do that;
I hope you can see it this time.

Cheers,
Alex


> 
>> Attached you can see some PDFs of the page:
>>
>> uri.7.pdf
>>      Original uri.7, formatted with groff-1.23.0
>>
>> uri_PP.7.pdf
>>      I edited the original uri.7 to use PP instead of HP,
>>      and formatted with groff-1.23.0.
>>
>> uri_old.pdf
>>      Original uri.7, formatted with groff-1.22.4.
> 
> None of them look erroneous to me.
> 
> Regards,
> Branden

-- 
<http://www.alejandro-colomar.es/>
GPG key fingerprint: A9348594CE31283A826FBDD8D57633D441E25BB5

uri.HP.new.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document

uri.HP.old.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document

uri.PP.new.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document

uri.PP.old.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document

OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature