Reputation
22,953
Next tag badge:
153/100 score
19/20 answers
Badges
3 77 147
Newest
 Good Answer
Impact
~712k people reached

May
9
comment Can I get a \widebar without using the mathabx package?
@wipet: #1 Agreed, for some letters my \widebar is not that good, but that's the same for plain TeX's \hat j and \hat k. It's not surprising that your code yields nicer results in those cases: you have manual adjustments for them. #2 In the case of \widebar{\cal V} and \widebar{\cal W}, I like the output of my code a lot better that that of yours. Re "bug": You're right, I should adapt my code to work better in that case (although I'd say it's not a bug as I wrote "if the first token is a letter, use that letter for the computations", and \beta is not a letter).
May
9
comment Can I get a \widebar without using the mathabx package?
Thanks for your answer! I'd be interested to know what disadvantages of \skewchar you see for \widebar. I have two issues with your code: 1. you need a lot of manual work in \widebarE (I see you make an effort there; you'd have to do it all over for a different font), and 2., more seriously, you can't distinguish between different calligraphic letters. Have you tried \widebar{\cal W}?
May
1
comment Kerning super- and subscripts “semantically”
Ah, now I understand what you mean, thanks! Indeed, TeX is not well suited for using text fonts like cmr in math.
May
1
comment Kerning super- and subscripts “semantically”
Hmm, it appears my guess was not quite correct: CHARACTER O 173 is the only one with non-zero italic correction - no idea what character that is. And I have really no idea what could possibly have led to the decision to set \fontdimen2 to 0.3.
May
1
comment Kerning super- and subscripts “semantically”
Re #1: Right, it might be better to have two parameters. There's none for superscripts, which becomes apparent when one types A_2^2. What I was addressing with "not true" was that you wrote "used for another purpose". I don't know any instance where one would use \/ for a math font. Re #2: Ah, that's interesting! Right, I meant fonts with zero \fontdimen2. I didn't know that for msbm10 it's non-zero, and I find that very strange. I haphazard a guess that all characters from msbm10 have zero CHARIC - then it makes some sense. If I were to manipulate the font, I'd set \fontdimen2=0.
May
1
comment Kerning super- and subscripts “semantically”
Concerning "This is not very well concept in TeX": As I understand it, this is not true. In a math font, CHARIC is only used for positioning of subscripts, nothing else. The italic correction is always included if you use a character, as in A=W or WA. See also this answer of mine and this question.
Dec
22
comment TeX command with argument BEFORE the command
Do I get it right that this only allows you to define one command with an argument before it?
Aug
10
comment What's the proper way to typeset a differential operator?
@endolith: I don't visit the site often and just found your comment. Sorry, I didn't mean to blame electrical engineers! I don't even remember how I came up with this example. Do you have a suggestion how I could improve my answer?
Apr
27
comment Serious problem with \widebar
@Bernard: Oh, right. The old version already had that problem, too, so it appears that the new version is still better. I'll see if I can fix it.
Mar
8
comment Missing character 1 in font bbold11
Thanks a lot for the confirmation!
Mar
8
comment Missing character 1 in font bbold11
I like option 2 - thanks! But I'm still rather puzzled: Is this really a name clash? One file is Ubbold.fd, the other is ubbold.fd. Ah, maybe I understand now: Under Windows this is a name clash, under Linux it isn't. Correct?
Mar
8
comment Missing character 1 in font bbold11
@egreg: Do you mean "Refresh FNDB"? This is did. Otherwise, can you tell me how to rebuild the font name database?
Mar
8
comment Missing character 1 in font bbold11
I did remove (or rather, rename) ubbold.fd, but then the system didn't find Ubbold.fd ... at the moment I use the unsatisfactory solution of an additional copy of Ubbold.fd in my working directory. Any ideas?
Mar
7
comment Missing character 1 in font bbold11
@egreg: Thanks a lot for you help so far. I made a funny test: \IfFileExists{ubbold.fd}{\show\relax}{\show\bye}. Under MiKTeX, this shows \relax, und TeX Live it tries to show \bye although the file ubbold.fd exists!!
Mar
7
comment Missing character 1 in font bbold11
@karlkoeller: Strange ... I just even tried removing the MiKTeX folder in AppData\Local, but the error persists.
Dec
15
comment How to avoid widow lines after displayed equations
Great, now it works as I would expect - thanks a lot! It would be great if one could somehow determine the end of displayed math and do the penalty thing there. Of course I'd like to that thing to work for align and friends, too. But I don't use too many different display environments, so it might be possible to do it manually.
Dec
6
comment How to avoid widow lines after displayed equations
Thanks for your answer! I'm not sure at all, but I've got the impression that your code works due to some kind of LaTeX bug: If "one line of text" starts a new paragraph, then it goes to the next page as I want - so far so good. But somehow this only happens because then the first page ends with an empty line which leaves no space for "one line of text". I have no idea at all where this empty line comes from!
Nov
23
comment {(x+y)}^2 or (x+y)^2?
@einpoklum: That's what I was saying all the time: math-wise they do. (And typesetting-wise, the output is fine without braces; see Jobobs' answer. Knuth designed the TeX-engine in such a way that you don't have to type braces in order to get nice output.)
Nov
22
comment {(x+y)}^2 or (x+y)^2?
@einpoklum: What I meant: For me, the parentheses () do already bunch the formula together, so there's no need for braces.
Nov
22
comment {(x+y)}^2 or (x+y)^2?
@einpoklum: Well, I'm a mathematician, so I don't see inappropriate semantics here - why should I surround parentheses with braces? I agree that this feature of the typesetting engine is cumbersome, but it's less a design choice than a limitation of computers from the late seventies, when the choice was made. It would of course be great if LuaTeX or some other engine would offer better typesetting in such a case.