4

When trying to create any document with babel and algorithmicx, e.g.:

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage[hebrew,english]{babel}
\usepackage{algorithmicx}

\begin{document}
Hello, world.
\end{document}

I get an error in algorithmicx.sty:

...
("C:\Program Files\MiKTeX 2.9\tex\latex\algorithmicx\algorithmicx.sty"
("C:\Program Files\MiKTeX 2.9\tex\latex\base\ifthen.sty")
Document Style algorithmicx 1.2 - a greatly improved `algorithmic' style
! Missing \endcsname inserted.
<to be read again> 
                   \protect 
l.636 \algnewlanguage{default}
                          %

This is slightly related to the algorithmic + Hebrew babel conflict for which I got useful answers - but only in the sense of there seeming to be a long-standing package conflict which for some reason has not been resolved in a distribution.

I'm using MikTeX 2.9.

|improve this question
  • I also get this error with TeX Live 2011 (and also if I load the packages in the converse order). – N.N. Oct 21 '11 at 7:32
5

It is the same problem as mentioned in the question you linked to: hebrew redefines \@arabic and algorithmicx fails. Imho the faulty package is algorithmicx. It shouldn't use \arabic to get a number. 

\documentclass{article}

\usepackage[hebrew,english]{babel}
\makeatletter
\def\@arabic#1{\number#1}
\makeatother
\usepackage{algorithmicx}

\begin{document}
Hello, world.
\end{document}
|improve this answer
  • Of course this will break what hebrew.ldf does in order to change writing directions for numbers. – egreg Oct 21 '11 at 10:11
  • But what if I need the \@arabic as babel defines it, as egreg notes? I've tried going over the source of the modified algorithmic.sty linked to from the other question, to see if I could do something similar for algorithmicx, but I don't see where exactly in algorithmicx the problem is which causes the \csname to fail. – einpoklum Oct 21 '11 at 10:13
  • Specifically, I tried replacing the uses of \arabic with \@@arabic, which rlbabel.def makes a synonym of the 'original' \arabic - and that didn't work. – einpoklum Oct 21 '11 at 10:24
  • @egreg: Yes I know that it will break the definition of hebrew. I only wanted to show that the definition of \@arabic is the source of the problem. @Eyal: You must search for the places where algorithmicx use \arabic{<counter>}. They should probably all be replaced by \the\value{<counter>} or \number\value{<counter}. But better write to the author. He should change his code (and make the necessary tests). – Ulrike Fischer Oct 21 '11 at 10:28
  • @Ulrike: Have written the author, Szasz Janos. Seeing how there have been no updates for 6 years, I'm not optimistic. Also, I made this replacement (to \number\value{<counter>}), but then I get a ! Missing number, treated as zero. error. – einpoklum Oct 21 '11 at 12:23
2

Quoting from source2e, when dealing with \newcounter{foo}:

\thefoo and \p@foo must be defined in such a way that \edef\bar{\thefoo} or \edef\bar{\p@foo} defines \bar so that it will evaluate to the counter value at the time of the \edef, even after \c@foo and any other counters have been changed. This will happen if you use the standard commands \@arabic, \@Roman, etc.

(the source says \foocounter, but it should be \c@foo).

Unfortunately, the babel module for Hebrew redefines \@arabic in a way that's not compatible with the specifications set forth in source2e: this is found in

\let\@@arabic\@arabic
\def\@arabic#1{\@number{\@@arabic#1}}
\def\@number{\protect\@@number}
\def\@@number#1{\ifmmode\else\beginL\fi#1\ifmmode\else\endL\fi}

Any package that relies on \thefoo expanding to the commands for representing the counter value will suffer from the same problems.

|improve this answer
  • I presume you mean \c@foo instead of \p@foo? – Roelof Spijker Oct 21 '11 at 9:57
  • @wh1t3 No, that's correct. With \newcounter{foo} also \p@foo is defined; usually it does nothing (\def\p@foo{}), but it's used in \refstepcounter: with \refstepcounter{foo}, \@currentlabel is defined to be the expansion of \p@foo\thefoo. – egreg Oct 21 '11 at 10:10
  • Interesting, I see that \@definecounter lets \p@foo to \empty. What I don't understand however, is how \newcounter then defines \p@foo in such a way that \edef\bar{\p@foo} defines \bar so that it will evaluate to the counter value at the time of the \edef. – Roelof Spijker Oct 21 '11 at 10:20
  • @wh1t3 That's only an example; one probably would use \edef\bar{\p@foo\thefoo}, but one is free to do whatever they want with \p@foo. – egreg Oct 21 '11 at 10:22
  • The quote sets specifications for \thefoo and \p@foo, not for commands defined with this commands. Also more importantly it doesn't force \@arabic, \@Roman or any \thefoo to expand so that they can be used in contexts where a number is required - and that is how the package is using \arabic. They should only evaluate the counter, not give the value of the counter. – Ulrike Fischer Oct 21 '11 at 10:44

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.