The boxes and glue system seems to be both the strength and weakness of TeX. One of the major problems I often have to deal with is uneven distances between lines as in the example below.
Inserting some \smash
commands around the math proves that this extra line spacing is not at all necessary; there is plenty of room for the math on lines of standard height:
Currently, inserting \smash
commands manually is the only acceptable solution I have found to this problem, as I doubt messing with the interline glue is a good idea (or what?). I wonder if there is an automatic way to accomplish this? Can I prevent TeX from adjusting the line height based on the size of inline math?
You might think:
But what if you want to place large structures, like matrices, in inline math? Certainly you do not want them to collide with the adjacent lines?
But the fact is that I never place matrices or similar large constructions in inline math. In my opinion, such things belong entirely in displayed math.
\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{mathtools}
\DeclareMathOperator\Ad{Ad}
\usepackage{lipsum}
\begin{document}
Consider the map~$\Ad_{g_0^2}$.
La la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la.
And the algebra~$\widetilde{A}$.
\lipsum[1]
Consider the map~\smash{$\Ad_{g_0^2}$}.
La la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la la.
And the algebra~\smash{$\widetilde{A}$}.
\lipsum[1]
\end{document}
\tilde{A}
, you can use in the preamble something like\setstretch{1.06}
fromsetspace
. Personally, I consider the interline spacing in LaTeX is very tight.\smash
ing is done automatically or manually. In both cases, the solution for me is to rewrite the text. To be clear, I do not, under any circumstances, want uneven line spacing. I prefer TeX to let the lines collide instead and then leave it to me to rewrite what I find necessary.\(..\)
for inline math then you just need\def\(#1\){\smash{$#1$}