Subject: [bug#77387] [PATCH 1/2] man-db: Parse man macro arguments better.

From: Sergey Trofimov <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2025 21:42:02 +0200

Hi Ludovic,

I've sent an amended series.

Ludovic Courtès <[email-masked]> writes:

>> +             (in-string? #f))
>> +    (if (>= pos (string-length input))
>> +        ;; End of input
>> +        (unless in-string?
>> +          (reverse (if (null? current)
>> +                       tokens
>> +                       (cons (list->string (reverse current)) tokens))))
>
> So this procedure can return *unspecified*, right?  Sounds fishy.
>
Why is it fishy? Is it unconventional? Such return value is handled
correctly by the calling code (`match`).