From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.comp.tex.context/15929 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Brooks Moses Newsgroups: gmane.comp.tex.context Subject: Re: Bug report, \frac as redefined in m-newmat.tex Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 15:52:40 -0700 Sender: ntg-context-bounces@ntg.nl Message-ID: <20040803155240.J15469@droplet.stanford.edu> References: <4.3.1.2.20040802014237.00b3b228@cits1.stanford.edu> <4.3.1.2.20040802014237.00b3b228@cits1.stanford.edu> <4.3.1.2.20040803112545.01646f78@cits1.stanford.edu> <41100E45.9030302@wxs.nl> Reply-To: mailing list for ConTeXt users NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1091573586 3838 80.91.224.253 (3 Aug 2004 22:53:06 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2004 22:53:06 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: ntg-context-bounces@ntg.nl Wed Aug 04 00:52:56 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from ronja.vet.uu.nl ([131.211.172.88] helo=ronja.ntg.nl) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1Bs89Q-0001sd-00 for ; Wed, 04 Aug 2004 00:52:56 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by ronja.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D45B1278C; Wed, 4 Aug 2004 00:52:55 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from ronja.ntg.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (ronja.vet.uu.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 28493-05; Wed, 4 Aug 2004 00:52:52 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from ronja.vet.uu.nl (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by ronja.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86BD91277A; Wed, 4 Aug 2004 00:52:52 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by ronja.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 222C41277A for ; Wed, 4 Aug 2004 00:52:51 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from ronja.ntg.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (ronja.vet.uu.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 28178-06 for ; Wed, 4 Aug 2004 00:52:50 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from smtp1.Stanford.EDU (unknown [171.67.16.123]) by ronja.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEE0A12772 for ; Wed, 4 Aug 2004 00:52:49 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from htgl-p6-moses.stanford.edu (htgl-p6-moses.Stanford.EDU [171.64.119.90]) by smtp1.Stanford.EDU (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i73Mqf6J007604; Tue, 3 Aug 2004 15:52:42 -0700 Original-Received: (from brooks@localhost) by htgl-p6-moses.stanford.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id PAA24058; Tue, 3 Aug 2004 15:52:40 -0700 Original-To: mailing list for ConTeXt users Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i In-Reply-To: <41100E45.9030302@wxs.nl>; from pragma@wxs.nl on Wed, Aug 04, 2004 at 12:14:29AM +0200 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at ntg.nl X-BeenThere: ntg-context@ntg.nl X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: mailing list for ConTeXt users List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: ntg-context-bounces@ntg.nl X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at ntg.nl Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.comp.tex.context:15929 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.comp.tex.context:15929 On Wed, Aug 04, 2004 at 12:14:29AM +0200, Hans Hagen Outside wrote: > Brooks Moses wrote: > > That fixes the problem on my end; thanks! > > > > Will you be updating the defintions of \tfrac, \dfrac, and so forth in > > m-newmat to match? I admit to not being too sure whether I think it's > > a good idea to support using math constructs such as \frac > > do they need patching? they don't use \mathematics afaik They don't need patching in the sense of fixing a bug, no -- it's more a matter of consistency in behavior. What I see is that there's a list of definitions for \frac, \dfrac, \tfrac, and various other similar forms, all of which can be used in math mode only, and do not use \mathematics. Then, a couple of lines after that, there's the second definition for \frac, which is the one that needed patching. This one, unlike the first definition, is wrapped in \mathematics so that it can work outside math mode. So I'm wondering why only \frac has this second definition that allows it to work outside of math mode. I would think that things should be consistent -- either that all of the definitions in the first list should be changed to use \mathematics, or that \frac should be returned to the simpler version -- so that \tfrac is still simply "\frac typeset in text mode" as one would expect it to be. Even if they're all left in the current form, I'd think that the unused definition of \frac in the first list should be removed. My argument for simplifying \frac to take the \mathematics out of it is that it is a math-mode construct that typesets its arguments in math mode, and allowing it to be used outside of math mode encourages sloppy TeXing. It also hides the point of transition to math mode, meaning that x and \frac{1}{x} will typeset x differently, which strikes me as confusing. I recognize that this is a very debatable position, though, and that there are at the very least arguments for backwards compatiblity that contradict it. - Brooks