# Alignment of fractions of the form (a-b)/(c-d)

The fraction \frac{num}{den} are usually rendered by centering the numerator and the denominator.

Unfortunately, I find the result in the following MWE quite ugly:

\documentclass{article}

\begin{document}

If $r\neq 1$, then

$\sum_{k=0}^nr^k = \frac{1-r^{n+1}}{1-r}$

\end{document}


Indeed, the $r^{n+1}$ part is too big. I wish that the two - signs of a fraction of the form \frac{a-b}{c-d} to be vertically aligned (whatever the size of a,b,c and d) at the center of the fraction, in order to show the symmetry of the formula.

How can I get such a result?

Note: if it matters for the answer, I would like the alignment to work also for inline maths mode.

• Unrelated point 1, \displaystyle isn't a command, it's a switch, like {\bfseries foo} In its role as a switch it will almost never need braces, but if it did need them, they would have to be like {\displaystyle }. That's the general rule for switches anyway, although I'm not sure \displaystyle would be very happy with you if you tried to scope it like this, I haven't tried. Unrelated point 2, $...$ enters display math mode by definition, so \displaystyle is completely redundant Oct 10, 2016 at 1:44
• What do you mean by working in non-maths mode? You can't use \frac{}{} in text mode so no solution can possibly be applicable there.
– cfr
Oct 10, 2016 at 2:22
• @au101: thanks a lot. I had been taught the wrong way. I edited the code. Oct 10, 2016 at 2:45
• @cfr: I meant inline. Oct 10, 2016 at 2:45

If you really think this is what you want, here's the \diffratio macro:

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{amsmath}

\makeatletter
\newcommand{\diffratio}[4]{%
\frac
{\diffratio@left{#1}{#3}-\diffratio@right{#2}{#4}}
{\diffratio@left{#3}{#1}-\diffratio@right{#4}{#2}}%
}

\newcommand{\diffratio@left}[2]{%
\mathpalette\diffratio@left@i{{#1}{#2}}%
}
\newcommand{\diffratio@right}[2]{%
\mathpalette\diffratio@right@i{{#1}{#2}}%
}
\newcommand\diffratio@left@i[2]{%
\diffratio@measure{#1}{#2}%
\hb@xt@\dimen@{\hss\box\z@}%
}
\newcommand\diffratio@right@i[2]{%
\diffratio@measure{#1}{#2}%
\hb@xt@\dimen@{\box\z@\hss}%
}
\newcommand\diffratio@measure[2]{%
\sbox\z@{$\m@th#1\@firstoftwo#2$}%
\sbox\tw@{$\m@th#1\@secondoftwo#2$}%
\dimen@=\wd\z@
\ifdim\wd\tw@>\dimen@ \dimen@=\wd\tw@\fi
}
\makeatother

\begin{document}

\begin{gather*}
\end{gather*}

\end{document}


I have no doubt whatsoever that the normal \frac way is better.

• Aesthetically the normal way is of course better. I'm even struggling to think of a teaching situation where this would be useful. And what happens (more a question for the OP, but also what happens with this the code) if you have \frac{a-b}{a-b-c}? Oct 10, 2016 at 10:34
• @ChrisH There's no natural alignment possible in your example. Oct 10, 2016 at 10:57
• I thought you'd say that. And I see you've put the onus on the user to make the decision as to where to break it Oct 10, 2016 at 11:06

Do you mean something like this?

That looks pretty ugly to me, but they say beauty is in the eye of the beholder ...

\documentclass{article}

\begin{document}

If $r\neq 1$, then
$\sum_{k=0}^nr^k = \frac{1-r^{n+1}}{1-r^{\phantom{n+1}}}$

\end{document}

• That's what I am looking for. Maybe with some space on the left, so that the minus signs have a central position. Is there a way I can make it automatic? A a macro \diffratio{a}{b}{c}{d}? Oct 10, 2016 at 2:50
• I find ”ugly“ too weak for describing that output. Oct 10, 2016 at 6:24
• The problem with this layout is that it looks like the printer has accidentally left out an index from the denominator. Oct 10, 2016 at 8:43

If you really want the two to line up, you need to add \phantom as a space filler.

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{mathtools}% for \mathrlap

\begin{document}

If $r\neq 1$, then

$\sum_{k=0}^nr^k = \frac{1-r^{n+1}}{1-r^{\phantom{n+1}}} = \frac{1-r^{\mathrlap{n+1}}}{1-r} \phantom{\scriptstyle n+1}\textrm{with added white space}$

\end{document}