[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[O] gmx-test

From: Rasmus
Subject: [O] gmx-test
Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2013 01:07:54 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux)

Nicolas Goaziou <address@hidden> writes:

> Hello,
> Thanks for the patch. Here are some comments about it.
> Rasmus <address@hidden> writes:
>> Currently one can't write something like \beta_t and get a nice result
>> in org when exporting to LaTeX (where nice result := $\beta_t$).  This
>> patch tries to fix it.
> Translating \beta_t into $\beta$$_\text{t}$ and \beta_bar into
> $\beta$$ \text{bar}$ is intended.
> Unless you explicitly ask for math mode, Org defaults to text mode. The
> fact that it needs to go through math mode to insert some entities is
> not relevant. IOW, there's a difference between \beta_{$t$} and \beta_t.
> Also, merging consecutive subscript and superscript is fragile (and the
> code in `org-latex--script-size' could be improved in that area), as it
> also depends on user's filters. Here is a contrived example:
> Let's assume I have a filter which removes any subscript with the letter
> "a" in it. With the following code:
>   \beta_a
> Trying to merge both the entity and the subscript will return
>   $\beta
> which is wrong.
>> As is evident from the pdf output
>>   $\alpha$$\beta$$_{\text{t}}$ ≠ $\alpha$$\beta$$_{{t}}$ ≠ $\alpha\beta_{t}$
>> There seems to be no difference between $\alpha$$\beta$ and
>> $\alpha\beta$ in the pdf, but the latter is more aesthetically
>> pleasing in the source.
> Beautifying LaTeX code is fine, unless it means adding yet another
> variable, and making some assumptions about user's configuration. If it
> ain't broken, don't fix it.
> Regards,

. . . The proofs are technical in nature and provides no real understanding.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]