0

This question already has an answer here:

How can I make a little wider bar ?! Is that possible without defining any new commands ? Here is a screenshot of the entry on which I want to typeset a wider bar.

enter image description here

marked as duplicate by Andrew Swann, user13907, Martin Schröder, egreg math-mode Nov 7 '16 at 8:55

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

  • Use \overline, but are you sure the bar even need to cover the subscript? And yes overline looks different than bar, that us because bar is part of the font (it is also non stretchable) and overline (can stretch) but is a construction independent of the font. – daleif Oct 31 '16 at 15:57
  • I used \overline earlier but it looks a bit different from the bar that is there is no little space between the entry and the wide line the \overline command creates, unlike the bar sign. Can this be solved ? – Hussein Eid Oct 31 '16 at 15:59
  • Not sure if there are good solutions. – daleif Oct 31 '16 at 16:01
4

You can use Hendrik Vogt's code in his answer to a similar question, or use the \widebar command from mathabx.

Here is a way to use it without having to load the package:

    \documentclass[12pt, a4paper]{article}

\DeclareFontFamily{U}{mathx}{\hyphenchar\font45}
\DeclareFontShape{U}{mathx}{m}{n}{
      <5> <6> <7> <8> <9> <10>
      <10.95> <12> <14.4> <17.28> <20.74> <24.88>
      mathx10
      }{}
\DeclareSymbolFont{mathx}{U}{mathx}{m}{n}
\DeclareFontSubstitution{U}{mathx}{m}{n}
\DeclareMathAccent{\widebar}{0}{mathx}{"73}

    \begin{document}

 \[ \overline{a_{ij}a_{jk}}\quad \widebar{a_{ij}a_{jk}} \]

 \[ \overline{A_{ij}}\quad \widebar{A_{ij}} \]


    \end{document}

enter image description here

  • Note that this is the implementation in Leo Liu's answer to the linked question. – Andrew Swann Nov 7 '16 at 7:31
  • @Andrew Swann: I didn't notice it. Actually, I use Hendrik Vogt's solution when I need a wide bar, as I was not fully satisfied by the mathabx solution in some cases. – Bernard Nov 7 '16 at 9:00

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