TeX - LaTeX Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for users of TeX, LaTeX, ConTeXt, and related typesetting systems. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I want to write something like MIMO (multiple-input and multiple-output) configuration 2 x 2, 2 x 4, etc. and be consistent all over the document. For now I have defined a command to do that as I put in the MWE. However, I don't know if it is the best approach. Furthermore, how would you typeset IEEE standards, like IEEE 802.11g?




MIMO configuration \mimo{2}{2}, \mimo{2}{4}, and \mimo{4}{4} would be good for \mbox{IEEE\,802.11g}.

share|improve this question
up vote 4 down vote accepted

the \mbox means that you are definitely not in math mode so the tests that \ensuremath do to get into math mode are redundant. If you keep the \mbox you could just use $..$. Putting the code in a box does have the disadvantage that the space around the \times is frozen to its natural length so can not stretch or shrink to help linebreak the surrounding paragraph and match the word spacing on the line.

Assuming that you only use digits the \mathrm is redundant as digits come from that font anyway.

Finally, perhaps it's the style in this context (which I don't know at all) but \,\times\, looks a bit spaced out to me. I'd probably do


which will prevent line breaking at the \times while still allowing some flexibility in the white space.

share|improve this answer
Your approach seems ok. I tried it (enclosing the command in a \makeatletter makeatother) and I liked the final result. However, if I have not only digits, shall I use then \newcommand*{\mimo}[2]{$\binoppenalty\@M\mathrm{#1\times#2}$}? – cacamailg May 8 '13 at 0:05
@cacamailg yes although I'd do \mathrm{#1}\times\mathrm{#2} which typesets to the same thing but seems more natural markup for a product of two (roman) identifiers the fact that \mathrm doesn't affect the \times so you can just use one \mathrm it is more of an implementation detail than a feature. – David Carlisle May 8 '13 at 0:13
Ok. For the IEEE standards I will probably keep the way I was doing. – cacamailg May 8 '13 at 0:16
I believe that $\mathrm{#1\times\nolinebreak#2}$ is easier. ;-) – egreg May 8 '13 at 8:26

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.