5

I've been using split environment from amsmath. A problem that I've run into is that if an & for alignment is placed next to a binary operator, the spacing on that side of the operator is reduced from what it should be.

Here is a minimal example:

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\begin{document}

\begin{equation}
    f(x) = m x^2 + b
\end{equation}

\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
    f(x) = & m x^2 \\
    & + b
\end{split}
\end{equation}

\end{document}

split spacing

Any idea how to avoid this issue without having to fiddle around with manual spaces each time?

|improve this question
  • 2
    Either use &= or ={}& – egreg Jul 18 '13 at 21:16
6

The usual way of using the alignment operator is either & = (on the left side), or via ={} & (to correct the spacing around the binary relation. Here's how you would use both:

enter image description here

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{amsmath}% http://ctan.org/pkg/amsmath
\begin{document}

\begin{equation}
  f(x) = m x^2 + b
\end{equation}

\begin{equation}
  \begin{split}
    f(x) = & m x^2 \\
    & + b
  \end{split}
\end{equation}

\begin{equation}
  \begin{split}
    f(x) & = m x^2 \\
    &\phantom{{}={}} + b
  \end{split}
\end{equation}

\begin{equation}
  \begin{split}
    f(x) ={} & m x^2 \\
    & + b
  \end{split}
\end{equation}

\end{document}

Note how the correction for the \phantom relation = ensures proper spacing.

|improve this answer
  • #3 is the only one i'd consider "correct". another variant (essentially what's recommended by knuth, migrated from plain tex to latex): f(x) &= mx^2 \\ &\quad b. (and you left a "how" out of the last sentence. not editing, since i just put in my own answer, and it looks greedy to have my fingerprints on all the answers.) – barbara beeton Jul 18 '13 at 21:26
  • Thanks. The last method (#4) works perfectly and is reasonably convenient. Do you know why the ampersand messes up spacing even though it is only being used as formatting mark-up? A technical limitation of LaTeX? – tarheels Jul 18 '13 at 21:31
  • @tarheels: As mentioned in barabara beeton's answer, it is expected to have the relation on the right side of &. So, technically you're not conforming to the required syntax. If you do, there's no problem. If you don't you have to do some magic to correct for this. – Werner Jul 18 '13 at 21:32
  • 1
    @tarheels -- latex interprets input linearly. if the & comes after the =, it's too late to decide what spacing to use. – barbara beeton Jul 18 '13 at 21:35
  • 1
    @tarheels: As @barbara mentioned, it's a case of syntax. In a similar vein there are other things that are physically required in LaTeX in some instances, yet in other's it's defined a little more loosely. For example, while you can end most environments using \end {<somenv>} (note the space), this is not possible with verbatim (by default). You explicitly need \end{verbatim}. There may be other instances where things just have to work a specific way, or else it fails. In some instances you can correct for this if the failure isn't fatal. – Werner Jul 18 '13 at 21:45
4

you're not following the recommended/required syntax. from the manual (texdoc amsldoc):

In the structures that do alignment (split, align and variants), relation symbols have an & before them but not after -- unlike eqnarray. Putting the & after the relation symbol will interfere with the normal spacing; it has to go before.

|improve this answer
  • Ah, thanks. I looked in the amsmdoc "User's Guide", but it didn't specifically mention this rule. – tarheels Jul 18 '13 at 21:27
  • @tarheels -- p.3, the paragraph just before "3.2 single equations". – barbara beeton Jul 18 '13 at 21:32

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.