Re: [NTG-context] Re: Re: nath catcode issues

7 Aug 2004

      Monday, July 5, 2004 Nikolai Weibull wrote:
...
* Giuseppe Bilotta  [Jul 05, 2004 14:00]:
...
Weird indeed. I'm not using the latest ConTeXt. (Actually I'm
quite back with the updates ... gotta get down to it.) I'll see
if upgrading gives me the same problem and in case get a fix.
...
OK.
I'm now using

ConTeXt  ver: 2004.6.30  fmt: 2004.7.27  int: english  mes: english

and your example

\usemodule[nath]

\starttext

$a, b, \dots, n$
\[
a=b, \dots c=d \dots
\]
\stoptext

uses, in order, \ldots, \ldots, \cdots which sounds like the
correct behaviour to me. The engine is

This is pdfeTeX, Version 3.141592-1.20a-rc4-2.1 (MiKTeX 2.4)
...
...
...
...
\def\over{\ifmmode\n@err{Disabled command \string\over }
 {No more a valid command. Replace {A \over B} with \frac A
 B.}\else\o@over\fi}
\def\atop{\ifmmode\n@err{Disabled command \string\atop }
 {No more a valid command. Use array instead.}\else\o@atop\fi}
\def\choose{\ifmmode\n@err{Disabled command \string\choose }
 {No more a valid command. Replace {A \choose B} with \binom A
 B.}\else\o@choose\fi}
...
Ah, of course...
  nikolai
It works like that? Excellent.
...
It seems I spoke too soon.  It does in fact not work.  \o@over can't be
put like that inside the if-statement.  A suggestion would be to re-work
the whole section and instead make it
...
\appendtoks
\def\over{\n@err{Disabled command \string\over }
 {No more a valid command. Replace {A \string\over B} with \string\frac A B.}}
\def\atop{\n@err{Disabled command \string\atop }
 {No more a valid command. Use array instead.}}
\def\choose{\n@err{Disabled command \string\choose }
 {No more a valid command. Replace {A \string\choose B}
with \string\binom A B. >>> }}
\to\everymath
...
but I don't know if that's a good solution.  It forces you to use
\string\over in the second argument to \n@err which I don't understand
why, but otherwise TeX runs out of stack space.  I suppose it's being
expanded even though it shouldn't be.
  nikolai
Also, I'm not sure that will work with text inside math. Can
you design a small test case that uses \over (directly or
indirectly) in normal text and in some \text inside a math
environment so that I can see what solution works fine?

In the meantime, I'm thinking along the lines of something like

\def\over{%
 \ifmmode\n@err{Disabled command \string\over }
  {No more a valid command. Replace {A \over B} with \frac A B.}%
  \let\next\relax
 \else\let\next\o@over\fi\next}
\def\atop{%
 \ifmmode\n@err{Disabled command \string\atop }
  {No more a valid command. Use array instead.}%
  \let\next\relax
 \else\let\next\o@atop\fi\next}
\def\choose{%
 \ifmmode\n@err{Disabled command \string\choose }
  {No more a valid command. Replace {A \choose B} with \binom A B.}%
  \lext\next\relax
 \else\let\next\o@choose\fi\next}

which should be robust enough. Can you try it in the context
where my previous solution busted?

-- 
Giuseppe "Oblomov" Bilotta