Because I am not fond of the look of tracking ("stretching") for math formulas, I generally use ${...}$ instead of $...$ for math formulas. (Please respect this aesthetic preference of mine.) However quite often, this leads to overshoot lines. Here is some working example code leading to this problem:
\documentclass{article}
\begin{document}
Consider the following claim: ${a \in S \cap T}$ or
maybe ${a^2 + b^2 = c^2}$ and ${e^{\pi i} + 1 = 0}$, but
not ${xy = abc = uvw}$ or ${a/b = c/d = \frac{e}{f}}$
are interesting formulas. The preceding text was meant
to cause overshoot mathematical formulas.
\end{document}
Specifically, here the word "preceding" is broken between lines 2 and 3 as pre-ceding, but line 1 has the formula ${e^{\pi i} + 1 = 0}$ overshoot into the margin. The end of the equals sign aligns (roughly) with the end of the hyphen in "pre-ceding", with "0," being placed into the margin.
I would like to indicate an optional math formula line break before the equals sign. Is there a way to specify optional linebreak points for math formulas (just like \- can be used to indicate a hyphenation point for a word), while maintaining the constraint that math formulas are never tracked?
\hbox; without going into the details, it's pretty much like when you write\mbox{$...$}. My opinion is that space in formulas must be flexible. – egreg Jun 8 '12 at 8:50$x \in S$within a line of text, and the result is that the spaces around the element symbol get overly stretched, with all other spaces in the line appearing to be of ordinary size. This can look very ugly. – Lover of Structure Jun 9 '12 at 7:29${x \in S}\text{, if } x \le y$but never for the complete inline math. – Herbert Jun 9 '12 at 8:24