* ConTeXt: Math displ: $$ vs.\startformula
@ 1999-02-23 20:01 Tobias Burnus
1999-02-27 10:37 ` Taco Hoekwater
1999-02-27 13:16 ` Hans Hagen
0 siblings, 2 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Tobias Burnus @ 1999-02-23 20:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
Hi,
whats the exact difference between $$ and \start/stopformula -- or why
does this work
\platziereformel[test]{a}$$a+b+c=\ln (x/y) = \ln x - \ln y$$
and why does this not
\platziereformel[test]{a}%
\startformel
a+b+c=\ln (x/y) = \ln x - \ln y
\stopformel
Tobias
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: ConTeXt: Math displ: $$ vs.\startformula
1999-02-23 20:01 ConTeXt: Math displ: $$ vs.\startformula Tobias Burnus
@ 1999-02-27 10:37 ` Taco Hoekwater
1999-02-27 12:51 ` Tobias Burnus
1999-02-27 13:16 ` Hans Hagen
1 sibling, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Taco Hoekwater @ 1999-02-27 10:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
Cc: NTG-ConTeXt
>>>>> "TB" == Tobias Burnus <burnus@gmx.de> writes:
TB> Hi, whats the exact difference between $$ and \start/stopformula
TB> -- or why does this work
TB> \platziereformel[test]{a}$$a+b+c=\ln (x/y) = \ln x - \ln y$$
TB> and why does this not
TB> \platziereformel[test]{a}% \startformel a+b+c=\ln (x/y) = \ln x
TB> - \ln y \stopformel
Removing the % after \platziereformel here should remove the problem.
\platziereformel gobbles an extra argument to get rid of a possible
space between itself and the start of the formula. This fails if the
next thing is a macro instead of a 'tex command' like $$ and the is NO
space.
Taco
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: ConTeXt: Math displ: $$ vs.\startformula
1999-02-27 10:37 ` Taco Hoekwater
@ 1999-02-27 12:51 ` Tobias Burnus
1999-02-27 22:06 ` Hans Hagen
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Tobias Burnus @ 1999-02-27 12:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
Cc: NTG-ConTeXt
Taco Hoekwater wrote:
> Removing the % after \platziereformel here should remove the problem.
> \platziereformel gobbles an extra argument to get rid of a possible
> space between itself and the start of the formula. This fails if the
> next thing is a macro instead of a 'tex command' like $$ and the is NO
> space.
Well using
\platziereformel[alpha]{a}
$$
\int x\,{\rm d}x
$$
\bye
works, but this doesn't:
\platziereformel[alpha]{a}
\startformel
\int x\,{\rm d}x
\stopformel
\bye
!> Runaway argument?
!> a \startformel \int x\,{\rm d}x \stopformel \bye
!> ! Paragraph ended before \dodoplaatsformule was complete.
!> <to be read again>
!> \par
!> l.6
-----------------------
[mframed]
> TB> It looks as if the former is printed in textstyle.
>
> There is. We were at Dante, so this reply is a little late.
Doesn't matter, I simply used \displaystyle. Did they like eetex?
\formulenummer
Tobias
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: ConTeXt: Math displ: $$ vs.\startformula
1999-02-27 12:51 ` Tobias Burnus
@ 1999-02-27 22:06 ` Hans Hagen
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Hans Hagen @ 1999-02-27 22:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
Tobias Burnus wrote:
> works, but this doesn't:
> \platziereformel[alpha]{a}
> \startformel
> \int x\,{\rm d}x
> \stopformel
You're right. The subnumber spec interferes. I send you a patch in a
seperate mail. The next specs are all valid now:
\platziereformel[alpha]$$\int x\,{\rm d}x$$
\platziereformel[alpha]$$\int x\,{\rm d}x$$
\platziereformel[alpha] $$\int x\,{\rm d}x$$
\platziereformel[alpha]{a}$$\int x\,{\rm d}x$$
\platziereformel[alpha]{a} $$\int x\,{\rm d}x$$
\platziereformel[alpha] {a} $$\int x\,{\rm d}x$$
\platziereformel[alpha]\startformel \int x\,{\rm d}x \stopformel
\platziereformel[alpha] \startformel \int x\,{\rm d}x \stopformel
\platziereformel[alpha]{a}\startformel \int x\,{\rm d}x \stopformel
\platziereformel[alpha]{a} \startformel \int x\,{\rm d}x \stopformel
\platziereformel[alpha] {a}\startformel \int x\,{\rm d}x \stopformel
\bye,
Hans
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | mail: pragma@wxs.nl
ConTeXt and PPCHTeX site: www.ntg.nl/context
-----------------------------------------------------------------
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: ConTeXt: Math displ: $$ vs.\startformula
1999-02-23 20:01 ConTeXt: Math displ: $$ vs.\startformula Tobias Burnus
1999-02-27 10:37 ` Taco Hoekwater
@ 1999-02-27 13:16 ` Hans Hagen
1 sibling, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Hans Hagen @ 1999-02-27 13:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
Cc: NTG-ConTeXt
Tobias Burnus wrote:
> whats the exact difference between $$ and \start/stopformula -- or why
\placeformula ... \startformula ... \stopformula
:: correct spacing, referencing, formulanumber
\placeformula ... $$ ... $$
:: the same, but $$ is useless in editor based syntax checking
$$ ... $$
:: the pure tex way, fuzzy spacing
\startformula ... \stopformula
:: well defined spacing, consistent with other spacing
So, I suggest to avoid the $$ alternatives.
> does this work ...
See taco's answer.
Hans
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | mail: pragma@wxs.nl
ConTeXt and PPCHTeX site: www.ntg.nl/context
-----------------------------------------------------------------
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~1999-02-27 22:06 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
1999-02-23 20:01 ConTeXt: Math displ: $$ vs.\startformula Tobias Burnus
1999-02-27 10:37 ` Taco Hoekwater
1999-02-27 12:51 ` Tobias Burnus
1999-02-27 22:06 ` Hans Hagen
1999-02-27 13:16 ` Hans Hagen
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).