From 405e47cacdc61ac61b421591dfb92434ebffaeb9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Ben Harris Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2007 16:05:28 +0000 Subject: I've worked out why ligation was being (correctly) suppressed in code paragraphs and found some cases where it isn't. Add test cases for these to remind me to deal with them later. [originally from svn r7060] --- inputs/test.but | 7 +++++++ 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+) (limited to 'inputs') diff --git a/inputs/test.but b/inputs/test.but index 72f8719..04ac8e6 100644 --- a/inputs/test.but +++ b/inputs/test.but @@ -244,6 +244,13 @@ u \cfg{input-charset}{ASCII} +Testing ligatures in normal (fi), empasised (\e{fi}), code (\c{fi}) and +weak code (\cw{fi}). The latter two should not be ligated. + +\c Also in a code paragraph (fi) with bold (fi) and italic (fi). +\e bb ii +\c There should be no ligation there. + \S{subhead} First subheading So here's a \I{subheading}\I{subsection}subsection. Just -- cgit v1.1