mandoc/TODO - diff

Return to TODO CVS log

Up to [cvsweb.bsd.lv] / mandoc

Diff for /mandoc/TODO between version 1.302 and 1.306

-version 1.302, 2020/04/26 21:41:07
+version 1.306, 2020/09/07 14:18:49
 Line 33  Obviously, as the issues have not been solved yet, the
 Line 33  Obviously, as the issues have not been solved yet, the
 Line 33  Obviously, as the issues have not been solved yet, the
  are mere guesses, and some may be wrong.
  ************************************************************************
+ * assertion failures
+ ************************************************************************
+ - .if n .ce in the middle of .TS data
+   afl case f1/id:000103,sig:06,src:009024+009105,op:splice,rep:2 (jes@)
+   While roff_parseln() prevents .ce and similar requests in the middle
+   of a tbl, the guard is no longer effective when the .ce is wrapped
+   in a roff block, for example a conditional.  The resulting assertion
+   has never been seen in any real-world manual page.
+   This is too dangerous to fix before release because it requires
+   reorganizing the very delicate internals of roff_parseln(),
+   which risks causing more severe bugs.
+   loc * exist *** algo *** size * imp *
+ ************************************************************************
  * missing features
  ************************************************************************
-Line 82  are mere guesses, and some may be wrong.
+Line 97  are mere guesses, and some may be wrong.
 Line 82  are mere guesses, and some may be wrong.
 Line 97  are mere guesses, and some may be wrong.
    Found in groffer(1) version 1.19
    Jan Stary 20 Apr 2019 20:16:54 +0200
    loc *  exist ***  algo ***  size **  imp *
+ - mandoc replaces all ASCII control characters except tab and line feed
+   with '?' during input.  It would be better to replace them with
+   Unicode escapes in preconv_encode() or somewhere in the vicinity,
+   such that the already existing better replacement strings show
+   up in the output.  Emulating groff is not desirable: groff replaces
+x00, 0x0b, and 0x0d to 0x1f with the empty string (bad because
+   that's easy to overlook for the document author), 0x01 with '.'
+   (very confusing), and passes through 0x02 to 0x08, 0x0c, and 0x7f
+   raw (bad because that is insecure output).  Remember that 0x07 may
+   need special handling because it is sometimes used for certain
+   delimiters, so it may need handling *after* roff.c rather than before.
+   reminded by John Gardner 16 Jun 2020 14:26:28 +1000
+   Actually, more ASCII control characters than just 0x07 may need
+   later handling because they can for example be used in macro names.
+   So they may need handling after roff(7) processing.
+   pointed out by John Gardner 23 Jun 2020 18:28:08 +1000
+   more info from John Gardner 29 Jun 2020 19:54:04 +1000
+   loc **  exist **  algo **  size **  imp *
  --- missing mdoc features ----------------------------------------------

CVSweb