Manual about hexadecimal lists

diff --git a/doc/ChangeLog b/doc/ChangeLog
index df15f789137a188c000a39290b8569a1a2096b4e..1ecde7b22f664159946f79eb4848d040808b1bb7 100644 (file)
--- a/doc/ChangeLog
+++ b/doc/ChangeLog
@@ -21,6 +21,11 @@
 
        * Makemore (ENCODINGS_DEF): Add encodings_local.def.
 
+2000-10-14  François Pinard  <pinard@iro.umontreal.ca>
+
+       * recode.texi (Listings): Document how to produce hexadecimal
+       conversion tables.
+
 2000-08-30  Bruno Haible  <haible@clisp.cons.org>
 
        * help2man: Upgrade to version 1.022.

diff --git a/doc/recode.texi b/doc/recode.texi
index 6a6af27de8134f17949db6d59f9ef6c8be38d80e..095102f026bbe7590c302ae72525398169bde10b 100644 (file)
--- a/doc/recode.texi
+++ b/doc/recode.texi
@@ -826,7 +826,8 @@ Strings @var{before} and @var{after} are cleaned before being used according
 to the syntax of @var{language}.
 
 Even if @code{recode} tries its best, this option does not always succeed in
-producing the requested source table.  It will however, provided the recoding
+producing the requested source table, it then prints @samp{Recoding is too
+complex for a mere table}.  It will succeed however, provided the recoding
 can be internally represented by only one step after the optimisation phase,
 and if this merged step conveys a one-to-one or a one-to-many explicit
 table.  Also, when attempting to produce sources tables, @code{recode}
@@ -834,6 +835,23 @@ relaxes its checking a tiny bit: it ignores the algorithmic part of some
 tabular recodings, it also avoids the processing of implied surfaces.
 But this is all fairly technical.  Better try and see!
 
+Most tables are produced using decimal numbers to refer to character
+values@footnote{The author of @code{recode} by far prefer expressing numbers
+in decimal than octal or hexadecimal, as he considers that the current
+state of technology should not force users anymore in such strange things.
+But Unicode people see things differently, to the point @code{recode}
+cannot escape being tainted with some hexadecimal.}.  Yet, users who know
+all @code{recode} tricks and stunts could indeed force octal or hexadecimal
+output for the table contents.  For example:
+
+@example
+recode ibm297/test8..cp1252/x < /dev/null
+@end example
+
+@noindent
+produces a sequence of hexadecimal values which represent a conversion
+table from @code{IBM297} to @code{CP1252}.
+
 Beware that other options might affect the produced source tables, these
 are: @samp{-d}, @samp{-g} and, particularly, @samp{-s}.