From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.comp.tex.context/7662
Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Patrick Gundlach <pg@levana.de>
Newsgroups: gmane.comp.tex.context
Subject: Re: "nicefrac" LaTeX package equivalent?
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 11:02:53 +0200
Sender: owner-ntg-context@let.uu.nl
Message-ID: <02041511025301.01046@levana>
References: <5.1.0.14.1.20020414223846.02c93e30@server-1>
NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035398109 21046 80.91.224.250 (23 Oct 2002 18:35:09 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2002 18:35:09 +0000 (UTC)
Original-To: ntg-context@ntg.nl
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.1.20020414223846.02c93e30@server-1>
Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.comp.tex.context:7662
X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.comp.tex.context:7662

Hi,

> hm, dunno packages that well -) does this mean that one macro has a whole
> package?

sometimes there are two or even more macros inside a packge! But that is 
the way LaTeX is: a small kernel with no changes in the last decade and a 
great number of additional stuff which is packed in packages. So you 
sometimes have pages of \usepackage{...} statements :)

> What do others think? Which one is the nicest for default (i opt for the
> (as usual best) third one, so that one goes into core-mis.tex and will
> end up in the documentation void -)

well, I don't like any of those. The spacing in the last two is too tight. 
The first one is kind of ok, but I'd choose a smaller / 

\def\textfrac#1#2%
   {\hbox{\tx\high{#1\kern-.15em}\raise .2ex\hbox {/}\low{\kern-.15em#2}}}

 test \textfrac{1}{2} test \textfrac{123}{456} test

This also comes close to what my favourite typography book says. I don't 
know if the def is bulletproof against other fonts/setups. 

-- 
Viele Grüße, 

    Patrick Gundlach