alarsyo/spot
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Wiki Activity

man: fix several issues

Browse source 
The \f(CW macro to switch to "constant-width" does not seem to
honored when converting to html, and I've found some patch to
groff removing its use from their own man page.
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/groff-commit/2020-07/msg00015.html
Lets use \fC instead, as it seems to produce some <tt> in HTML.

Two manpages had URLs pointing to spot.lrde.epita.fr instead of
spot.lre.epita.fr.

Finally, spot-x.x had an incorrectly closed .EX block, that completly
broke the HTML conversion.

* bin/man/autcross.x, bin/man/ltl2tgba.x, bin/man/ltlcross.x,
bin/man/spot-x.x, bin/man/spot.x: Fix the aforementioned issues.
This commit is contained in:
Alexandre Duret-Lutz 2024-04-03 23:05:12 +02:00
parent a17d8a0501
commit 848d1a3901
5 changed files with 44 additions and 44 deletions
Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

10
bin/man/ltl2tgba.x
View file

@ -13,7 +13,7 @@ condition, meanings that a run of the automaton is accepted iff it
visits ininitely often multiple acceptance sets, and it also uses
transition-based acceptance, i.e., those acceptance sets are sets of
transitions. TGBA are often more consise than traditional Büchi
automata. For instance the LTL formula \f(CWGFa & GFb\fR can be
automata. For instance the LTL formula \fCGFa & GFb\fR can be
translated into a single-state TGBA while a traditional Büchi
automaton would need 3 states. Compare
.PP
@ -158,11 +158,11 @@ are not recognized, i.e., infinite words that start with a bad prefix.
.PP
Because of this limited expressiveness, a monitor for some given LTL
or PSL formula may accept a larger language than the one specified by
the formula. For instance a monitor for the LTL formula \f(CWa U b\fR
will reject (for instance) any word starting with \f(CW!a&!b\fR as
the formula. For instance a monitor for the LTL formula \fCa U b\fR
will reject (for instance) any word starting with \fC!a&!b\fR as
there is no way such a word can validate the formula, but it will not
reject a finite prefix repeating only \f(CWa&!b\fR as such a prefix
could be extented in a way that is comptible with \f(CWa U b\fR.
reject a finite prefix repeating only \fCa&!b\fR as such a prefix
could be extented in a way that is comptible with \fCa U b\fR.
.PP
For more information about monitors, we refer the readers to the
following two papers (the first paper describes the construction of