3

Is it only me or does it get annoying whenever I've to write \limits before every operator? Is there a way to make that happen for every operator without having to list them all one by one?

\newcommand{\myint}{\int\limits} % <= Unwanted solution...
\myint_{\lambda_1}^{\lambda_2}

Context: I had to write over a thousand limits to realise really how redundant it is in my pdf... lol. So, I would really appreciate any tips.

4
  • 1
    Why are you adding \limits everytime in the first place?
    – daleif
    Sep 17 at 11:26
  • @daleif It is better stylistically (and for readability) for the purposes of compiling multiple proofs about important theorems around Lebesgue integrals.
    – Math3147
    Sep 17 at 11:29
  • You wrote, "does it get annoying whenever I've to write \limits before every operator?" Real quick (just in case it wasn't a simple typo): The modifier \limits should be written after, not *before", the associated "operator" -- ``\int, \sum, \prod`, etc.
    – Mico
    Sep 17 at 15:00
  • I was thinking of _{...} when I said operator (i.e. \int\limts_{\lambda_1}, sorry! @Mico
    – Math3147
    Sep 17 at 15:37
7

\int is defined as \DeclareRobustCommand\int{\intop\nolimits} specifically to avoid getting limits so you could use \intop or simply repeat the definition without the \nolimits which is fine although going against the usual mathematical typesetting tradition.

12
  • This answers is tor my context (hence my acceptance), but could this be modified for every operator without going through them all or no?
    – Math3147
    Sep 17 at 11:39
  • 1
    \int is the only command defined in the base latex that has \nolimits forced in this way. @Math3147 what other operator are you doing this with? Sep 17 at 11:44
  • Not specifically one, just generally, do you know of any way this could be done without listing every operator in a \newcommand way, as above? Or does it have to be listed always?
    – Math3147
    Sep 17 at 11:55
  • 1
    @Math3147 I do not understand the question. You only need to do \DeclareRobustCommand\int{\intop} so that is just one line and applies to every \int in the document. The problem you describe (defaulting to \nolimits) does not apply to anything other than \int so I do not understand which operators you are "listing" Sep 17 at 12:46
  • When you've \sum or \bigoplus , et cetera, when inline, don't you need to put \limits? Or for example, when \limsup is said without \limits, it will look different. Or am I misunderstanding what you're referring to? (If so, sorry!)
    – Math3147
    Sep 17 at 15:42
6

You could load the amsmath package (or the mathtools package) with the option intlimits in order to save yourself from having to type

\int\limits

each and every time.

3
  • 2
    ah I should have remembered that: if the OP moves the tick I may delete mine:-) Sep 17 at 12:47
  • Thank you, that seems like a viable solution too. :)
    – Math3147
    Sep 17 at 15:50
  • 1
    @DavidCarlisle please don't: your answer is useful for those who use not-really-LaTeX parsers (like MathJax) and can't control options in packages. \intop works fine there.
    – Ruslan
    Sep 17 at 19:55

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.