Date:	Mon, 10 Jul 2000 19:21:25 +0300 (IDT)
From:	Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender:	eliz AT is
To:	Jeff Williams <jeffw AT darwin DOT sfbr DOT org>
cc:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: mkdoc patch, take 2
In-Reply-To:	<200007101538.KAA19567@darwin.sfbr.org>
Message-ID:	<Pine.SUN.3.91.1000710191743.11289A-100000@is>
MIME-Version:	1.0
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

On Mon, 10 Jul 2000, Jeff Williams wrote:

> -: > Can you not use `@columnfractions' to declare the first column
> -: > to be (for example) 10% and the second column to be 90%?
> -: 
> -: I don't see how.  To know how many percents the first column will take, 
> -: you again need the line length (because the longest item that goes into 
> -: the first column is measured in characters, not percents).
> 
> Since `we' (DJ et al.) create these docs, don't `we' get to assume
> a certain line size?

If the line length is known in advance, I think Rich would have had no 
problem in the first place.

We could, of course, assume the line length, but then the whole setup 
could break if it is changed later.

On balance, I think that the second column doesn't need too much space, 
so we could simply fix its length (in characters), by using a prototype 
column rather than the @columnfraction feature.

> If the first column is known not to exceed a certain number of
> characters

The code makes a point of computing the longest category, so we had 
better not assume anything else about that length.

- Raw text -