🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <JJC.92Apr12114305@jclark.com> jjc@jclark.com (James Clark) writes:
>I did a little test to compare the sizes of output generated by psroff
>and groff.  Here are the sizes of the PostScript output generated for
>the perl man page:

>psroff R3 PL10           562627
>  (optimization on)
>groff 1.05               305141
>groff 1.05               280310
>  (no pairwise kerning)  

>One difference is that groff can output multiple words in a single
>`show'.

That much?  Eeep!

Scramble scramble, type type.

Psroff PL11 will do line optimization - it's working already.
It can reduce the output by as much as 55%.

Egods tho, CAT troff refuses to read the width tables for the width
of space.  Oh crud.  At least this won't be a problem with gtroff
or ditroff.  On the other hand, this may be why a few people have
remarked that psroff's inter-word spacing is a little nicer (troff uses
1/3 point size for space width.  Postscript's space width is 1/3rd
narrower (12/432 @ 6 point versus 9/432 @ 6 point))

Was that with fill and justification on?

H'm.  Trying to steal my laserjet drivers are you?

[Just kidding!]
-- 
Chris Lewis; clewis@ferret.ocunix.on.ca; Phone: Canada 613 832-0541
Psroff 3.0 info: psroff-request@ferret.ocunix.on.ca
Ferret list: ferret-request@ferret.ocunix.on.ca