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 would like to typeset an operator like the one used to specify substitutions of variables with values in computer science. This is a sketch, just keep in mind that all this should span about on a single line, not two:

v /
 / x

v1, v_2 /
       / x1, x2

Obviously a simple v/x does not solve my problem, since v and x are written on the same exact line while I would like to have them smaller, with the v part aligned to the top of the / and the x aligned to the bottom.

Can you help me solving my problem please?

share|improve this question
1  
Can you point to an actual printed version of this notation? If simple v/x doesn't work, but the expression has to occupy a single line what would that look like? –  Alan Munn Oct 29 '11 at 15:10
    
Could you explain what is wrong with $v/x$? –  Seamus Oct 29 '11 at 15:11
    
@AlanMunn, Seamus: Werner already answered my question, thanks you however. I wanted v and x printed on a slightly different heights. –  Riccardo Oct 29 '11 at 15:29
    
I fixed my question in order to clarify this a little bit. –  Riccardo Oct 29 '11 at 15:31
    
@Riccardo The symbol is called a solidus –  Yiannis Lazarides Oct 29 '11 at 15:32
show 1 more comment

1 Answer

up vote 17 down vote accepted

It seems like you might be after so-called "vulgar fractions". One such package that provides this is xfrac by means of \sfrac{<num>}{<denom>}. A similar functionality is provided by nicefrac that supplies an analogous \nicefrac{<num>}{<denom>}. With package options one is also able to choose between "ugly" and "nice" (default) fractions. And finally there's faktor that produces similar-style fractions using \faktor{<num>}{<denom>} (it requires the amssymb package though). Here are some comparisons:

enter image description here

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{xfrac}% http://ctan.org/pkg/xfrac
\usepackage{nicefrac}% http://ctan.org/pkg/nicefrac
\usepackage{faktor}% http://ctan.org/pkg/faktor
\usepackage{amssymb}% http://ctan.org/pkg/amssymb
\usepackage{lmodern}% http://ctan.org/pkg/lmodern
\begin{document}
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.5}
\begin{tabular}{lll}
  \verb!\xfrac! & $\sfrac{\mathbf{v}}{x}$ & $\sfrac{\mathbf{v}_1,\mathbf{v}_2}{x_1,x_2}$ \\
  \verb!\nicefrac! & $\nicefrac{\mathbf{v}}{x}$ & $\nicefrac{\mathbf{v}_1,\mathbf{v}_2}{x_1,x_2}$ \\
  \verb!\faktor! & $\faktor{\mathbf{v}}{x}$ & $\faktor{\mathbf{v}_1,\mathbf{v}_2}{x_1,x_2}$
\end{tabular}
\end{document}

The choice of lmodern was because of minor font substitutions when it comes to typesetting the denominator & numerator. It is also possible to write a macro that would typeset these respective entries differently, if needed. My choice of \mathbf{...} for the numerator was just a style choice.

share|improve this answer
1  
Vulgar fractions... it's really difficult to search for the right packages when you don't know the correct keywords. This is exactly what I was looking for, thank you so much :) –  Riccardo Oct 29 '11 at 15:28
    
@Werner Have a look at Algebra and coalgebra in computer science, I am not sure that the correct symbol is used this way. –  Yiannis Lazarides Oct 29 '11 at 16:04
    
@YiannisLazarides: Either way, this may be personal preference. I am not familiar with fundamental computer science symbols and representations. –  Werner Oct 29 '11 at 16:06
1  
@Werner I am also not very familiar, especially with the new computer science, in my time it would have been := which we used generally as the assignment variable. –  Yiannis Lazarides Oct 29 '11 at 16:35
1  
@YiannisLazarides: Well, nowadays we still use := sometimes if we want to define things. The syntax I'm referring to has a different meaning. Suppose you have a formula P in some calculus, where some free variables appear. You write {v/x}P or [v/x] (you can see both, depending on the conventions chosen by the authors) to mean the formula resulting from substituting every free occurrence of x in P with v. –  Riccardo Oct 29 '11 at 22:14
add comment

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.