Hi, do we need both definitions in math-fen.mkiv? \installmathfencepair \lparen \Lparen \rparen \Rparen \installmathfencepair \lparent \Lparent \rparent \Rparent AFAIK \left\lparen should be the same as \left( but this doesn’t work because there is no defintion for \Lparen in math-fen.mkiv and char-def.lua contains only a entry for "lparent". Here is a short example with the output of \lparen (and \rparen): \starttext \startformula \left\lparen x \right\rparen % \left\langle x \right\rangle \left\lparent x \right\rparent \stopformula \type{\lparen }: \meaning\lparen \par \type{\rparen }: \meaning\rparen \par \type{\lparent}: \meaning\lparent \par \type{\rparent}: \meaning\rparent \stoptext Wolfgang
On 1/4/2016 12:50 PM, Wolfgang Schuster wrote:
Hi,
do we need both definitions in math-fen.mkiv?
\installmathfencepair \lparen \Lparen \rparen \Rparen \installmathfencepair \lparent \Lparent \rparent \Rparent
AFAIK \left\lparen should be the same as \left( but this doesn’t work because there is no defintion for \Lparen in math-fen.mkiv and char-def.lua contains only a entry for "lparent".
so: \let\lparen\lparent \let\rparen\rparent i think that they're there because some old time expectations but i have no problem dropping them Hans ----------------------------------------------------------------- Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | voip: 087 875 68 74 | www.pragma-ade.com | www.pragma-pod.nl -----------------------------------------------------------------
Hi,
I do not know the history of \lparen and \lparent
(not in the TeX Book nor in the LaTeX Companion),
but I find these abbreviations to be unfortunate.
As Hans knows, we eliminated them from the bibliography subsystem,
preferring "parenthesis" to "paren" or "parent".
These cryptic (and confusing) abbreviations should be avoided when
possible. But, of course, we should keep "sacred" abbreviations that are
standard in TeX (but not necessarily all offshoots).
Alan
PS, how is this better than the TeX \left( ?
(it shouldn't matter that it is one rather than two tokens.)
On Mon, 4 Jan 2016 13:46:22 +0100
Hans Hagen
On 1/4/2016 12:50 PM, Wolfgang Schuster wrote:
Hi,
do we need both definitions in math-fen.mkiv?
\installmathfencepair \lparen \Lparen \rparen \Rparen \installmathfencepair \lparent \Lparent \rparent \Rparent
AFAIK \left\lparen should be the same as \left( but this doesn’t work because there is no defintion for \Lparen in math-fen.mkiv and char-def.lua contains only a entry for "lparent".
so:
\let\lparen\lparent \let\rparen\rparent
i think that they're there because some old time expectations but i have no problem dropping them
Hans
----------------------------------------------------------------- Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | voip: 087 875 68 74 | www.pragma-ade.com | www.pragma-pod.nl ----------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ dev-context mailing list dev-context@ntg.nl http://mailman.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/dev-context
-- Alan Braslau CEA DSM-IRAMIS-SPEC CNRS UMR 3680 Orme des Merisiers 91191 Gif-sur-Yvette cedex FRANCE tel: +33 1 69 08 73 15 fax: +33 1 69 08 87 86 mailto:alan.braslau@cea.fr
On 1/4/2016 5:12 PM, Alan BRASLAU wrote:
Hi,
I do not know the history of \lparen and \lparent (not in the TeX Book nor in the LaTeX Companion), but I find these abbreviations to be unfortunate.
As Hans knows, we eliminated them from the bibliography subsystem, preferring "parenthesis" to "paren" or "parent".
These cryptic (and confusing) abbreviations should be avoided when possible. But, of course, we should keep "sacred" abbreviations that are standard in TeX (but not necessarily all offshoots).
Alan
PS, how is this better than the TeX \left( ? (it shouldn't matter that it is one rather than two tokens.)
that depends ... \left\foo : one token \left( : one token \left(( : interpreting ( ( becomes messy so better is just \lparent foo \rparent (tex is also a bit picky when it comes to unmatched \left and \right so we need to catch that too) some of the abbreviations are coming from all those messy incomplete cq. merged cq ... systems that deal with math (mathml entities, traditional who-knows-where-they-come-from names, too tolerant asciimath hybrids, etc.) so that's why we have more such funny names than needed: it's the way we support automated typesetting ... you really don't want to know what nightmarisch stuff we need to support so keep in mind that not all defined \commands in the core are intended for users, so \lparen is there but it can be for any reason (current or past), e.g. some crap we ran into that was supported someplace else and that we have to support maybe just because some sloppy programmer decided to support a sloppy user not realizing possible conflicts or bad side effects elsewhere) Hans ----------------------------------------------------------------- Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | voip: 087 875 68 74 | www.pragma-ade.com | www.pragma-pod.nl -----------------------------------------------------------------
On Mon, 4 Jan 2016, Hans Hagen wrote:
On 1/4/2016 12:50 PM, Wolfgang Schuster wrote:
Hi,
do we need both definitions in math-fen.mkiv?
\installmathfencepair \lparen \Lparen \rparen \Rparen \installmathfencepair \lparent \Lparent \rparent \Rparent
AFAIK \left\lparen should be the same as \left( but this doesn’t work because there is no defintion for \Lparen in math-fen.mkiv and char-def.lua contains only a entry for "lparent".
so:
\let\lparen\lparent \let\rparen\rparent
i think that they're there because some old time expectations but i have no problem dropping them
Probably because some users coming from latex expected them. The mathtools package defines \lparen and \rparen. Personally, I find "(l|r)parent" to be an awkward name for the macros because it is not clear what "parent" means. (l|r)parenthesis is a better choice or, if a short name is needed, then (l|r)paren (so that it is clear we are abbreviating the name). Aditya
participants (4)
-
Aditya Mahajan -
Alan BRASLAU -
Hans Hagen -
Wolfgang Schuster