7,050 reputation
2048
bio website
location Cambridge, United Kingdom
age
visits member for 4 years, 2 months
seen 17 mins ago

Researcher in quantum information --- involving algebras over finite dimensional Hilbert spaces, graphs and combinatorics, and vector spaces over ℤ/pℤ.

I habitually edit and re-edit anything I write, as long as I have the time, interest, and ability. I should probably apologize for this tendency, but you will probably have to be satisfied with being warned about it instead.


Aug
26
comment Reduce pseudocode font size (not global)
@flow: Unfortunately, I can't figure out a graceful way to do so. I just found out that my original answer also did not modify the size of the line-numbers: I've revised my answer to describe how to do that, at least.
Aug
26
revised Reduce pseudocode font size (not global)
revised answer to include instructions to change size of line numbers
Aug
26
revised Reduce pseudocode font size (not global)
minor revision
Aug
26
answered Reduce pseudocode font size (not global)
Aug
25
answered Disable keyword highlighting in lstset
Aug
25
comment Where is the \matrix command?
"Unfortunately, no one can tell you what the matrix is. Except for Werner, he seems to do it pretty well."
Aug
23
awarded  Self-Learner
Aug
21
comment Which IDE/Editor and “compiler” do you use for TeX/LaTeX? - How do macros work?
Based on your remark about Alt+A = $\forall$, etc., I'll ask: are you putting a dollar sign around each character in mathematics? You ought to be doing something more like $\forall\epsilon\exists\delta:\epsilon < \delta$, or the like. If you have a long list of equations, or a chained equation, you might want to be using displayed math environments instead, e.g. the align or gather environments provided by amsmath.sty. (If these are not your problems, my apologies.)
Aug
21
awarded  Yearling
Aug
8
comment LaTeX syntax for karp reduction
Me neither, so I DeTeXified it. ;-)
Aug
8
comment LaTeX syntax for karp reduction
Aesthetically, you may also prefer (as I do) the symbols \succcurlyeq and \preccurlyeq to their "non-curly" equivalents.
Jun
5
comment Side-by-side source and output when documenting a style file
I shall have to check it out. Nice eye-candy!
Jun
4
awarded  Mortarboard
May
30
comment Short names for macros
@Taco: Thanks for elaborating your response. For my part, I define short macros as a part of my workflow essentially to quickly prototype a document; this is not incompatible with later mechanically replacing macros afterwards by the author. As for the macros that I describe in my answer, even I hold it self-evident that they are an abomination never to be used in public! I entertained the question to amuse myself, to be honest. But then again, I also write documents (not professional articles) for which I don't care whether anyone else will ever see the source.
May
28
revised Short names for macros
cosmetic improvement to the answer
May
28
comment Short names for macros
I won't pretend that single-char names are immediately obvious to everyone. But in many cases it should very quickly become clear what a macro is, and why it is named that way, by a very quick comparison of the source and the output (to say nothing of reading the preamble). Having a consistent naming scheme for typefaces is just an extension of the same principle: e.g. when I write \newcommand\cH{\mathcal H}, I allow myself to think "calligraphic H" every time I write \cH. It's still a short name, and follows the same principle. But the advantage drops off at three or more characters.
May
28
revised Short names for macros
fixed url
May
28
comment Short names for macros
@Jukka: I have expanded my answer to incorporate using # as a character for macros in mathmode and displayed equations. (Barring any technical problems with my answer, I expect this will be my final revision.)
May
28
revised Short names for macros
simplified a phrase slightly
May
28
comment Short names for macros
Is there really such a thing as an exhaustive list of tricks? And if you think there is, do you intend to award the bounty to the one who accumulates them all into a single monolithic answer? I think it's better to have a collection of answers who each take some approach, and refine that one approach as much as possible.