1

I was trying to prepare a cheat sheet using the template posted by xport (Preparing cheat sheets)

However when I try to use "\begin{split}" I get an error

\begin{split} on input line...ended by \end{minipage}

However, if I use eqnarray it works fine. I wonder why "split" option does not work.

Below is my code,

\documentclass[table,cmyk]{article}
\usepackage[a4paper,margin=1cm,landscape]{geometry}
\usepackage{longtable,array,calc}
\usepackage{xcolor}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\makeatletter
\newcommand\ratio[2]{\strip@pt\dimexpr#1pt/#2\relax}
\newcolumntype{A}[2]
{
    >{\begin{minipage}[t]{#2\linewidth-2\tabcolsep-#1\arrayrulewidth}%
    \vspace{\tabcolsep}}%
    c%
    <{\vspace{\tabcolsep}\end{minipage}}%   
}
\makeatother

\pagestyle{empty}

\arrayrulewidth=1pt
\tabcolsep=10pt
\arrayrulecolor{red}

\usepackage{lipsum}
\begin{document}
\begin{longtable}
{
|A{1.5}{\ratio{30}{100}}% 30%
|A{1}{\ratio{30}{100}}% 30%
|A{1.5}{\ratio{40}{100}}% 40%
|%
}\hline
%Cell 1,1


\begin{equation} \label{eq1}
\begin{split}
A  & = \frac{\pi r^2}{2} \\
& = \frac{1}{2} \pi r^2
\end{split}
\end{equation}


The fundamental theorem of calculus,
\[
\int_a^b f(x)\,\textrm{d}x=F(b)-F(a)
\]
where \[\frac{\textrm{d}F(x)}{\textrm{d}x}=f(x)\]
&
%Cell 1,2
\LaTeX\ will make you confident! 
&
%Cell 1,3
\lipsum[1]
\tabularnewline\hline
%Cell 2,1
The fundamental theorem of calculus,
\[
\int_a^b f(x)\,\textrm{d}x=F(b)-F(a)
\]
where \[\frac{\textrm{d}F(x)}{\textrm{d}x}=f(x)\]
&
%Cell 2,2
\LaTeX\ will make you confident!
&
%Cell 2,3
\lipsum[2]
\tabularnewline\hline
\end{longtable}
\end{document}
0

1 Answer 1

2

If you lose the & symbols, it works. If you replace equation with gather you get a new error message (illegal \par detected). I suspect that longtable is parsing the contents of environments, but not macros or {...} blocks.

{\begin{equation} \label{eq1}
\begin{split}
A &= \frac{\pi r^2}{2} \\
 &= \frac{1}{2} \pi r^2
\end{split}
\end{equation}}

also works.

1
  • If I remove "&" symbols then I cannot align the equation however using one more "{}" blocks as you suggested solved my problem even though I am not totally sure why it solved the problem. Thanks.. Oct 6, 2015 at 5:57

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .