Take the 2-minute tour ×
TeX - LaTeX Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for users of TeX, LaTeX, ConTeXt, and related typesetting systems. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I have a very simple article, with one line:

$\epsilon \gtrsim \varepsilon$

If I use pdflatex to compile, \epsilon and \varepsilon are rendered in a different way, which is the correct behaviour.

However, I have to use pslatex, which renders both \epsilon and \varepsilon in the same way.

Why is this so? Can you reproduce this behaviour, or perhaps I am missing a package?

Edit. My working example.

\documentclass{article}

\begin{document}

  $\varepsilon \gtrsim \epsilon$

\end{document}

Also, to clarify: I do not need both renderings in my document. I need only \epsilon. However \epsilon is rendered as \varepsilon by pslatex

share|improve this question
    
Perhaps it depends on which command do you use? I too get two different symbols with pdflatex example.tex, but not with pslatex example.tex –  astabada Feb 12 at 10:56
    
Perhaps, I am not sure. Part of the question was why pdflatex can compile correctly while pslatex cannot. –  astabada Feb 12 at 11:23

1 Answer 1

up vote 8 down vote accepted

The two forms \epsilon and \varepsilon are just graphical variants of the same letter and using both unnecessarily confuses readers.

The pslatex package is obsolete and deprecated. You should have

\usepackage{mathptmx}

instead. Which doesn't solve your problem, anyway, because the Symbol font used for Greek letters doesn't have different glyphs for the two forms of epsilon (this agains shows one shouldn't rely on them being available).

You're luckier if you use NewTX, that sports different glyphs:

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{newtxtext,newtxmath}
\begin{document}
$\epsilon=\varepsilon$
\end{document}

enter image description here

If you really want different glyphs using mathptmx (not pslatex, please, it is obsolete and shouldn't be used), then

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{mathptmx}
\DeclareSymbolFont{epsilon}{OML}{ntxmi}{m}{it}
\DeclareMathSymbol{\epsilon}{\mathord}{epsilon}{"0F}

\begin{document}
$\epsilon=\varepsilon$
\end{document}

will do. But it's a hack and relies on having available the NewTX fonts. An even worse hack is to use Computer Modern Math Italic:

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{mathptmx}
\DeclareSymbolFont{epsilon}{OML}{cmm}{m}{it}
\DeclareMathSymbol{\epsilon}{\mathord}{epsilon}{"0F}

\begin{document}
$\epsilon=\varepsilon$
\end{document}

enter image description here

share|improve this answer
    
What should I use rather than pslatex then? Moreover, the packages that you have suggested do not improve the situation (when still using pslatex). In fact both commands get rendered as \varepsilon when all I need is a vanilla \epsilon. Thanks –  astabada Feb 12 at 10:06
1  
@astabada As I said, you should not load pslatex. But, as I said, the “good” package to be used instead, that is, mathptmx, doesn't have different glyphs. Which is what I wrote. If you really need them use the code in the example document; the text font will be Times. –  egreg Feb 12 at 10:10
    
See my update of the question for a working example. I understand that I should not use pslatex to compile. But what other command line command - other than pdflatex - is to be used to create the document? pdflatex is not an option because it gives errors when compiling the full document, which includes *eps files. –  astabada Feb 12 at 10:19
    
@astabada You can't have two different glyphs with pslatex or mathptmx, because the font used hasn't the different forms. With \usepackage{newtxtext,newtxmath} you do get different forms. –  egreg Feb 12 at 10:37
1  
@astabada I agree with egreg (for once), you really shouldn't be using pslatex this century (I wrote it last century, when things were different). –  David Carlisle Feb 12 at 11:26

Your Answer

 
discard

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.