Re: [NTG-context] equivalent to \newcommand{...}{\ensuremath{...}}

Am 09.12.2014 um 09:59 schrieb j. van den hoff :

On Tue, 09 Dec 2014 09:42:03 +0100, Wolfgang Schuster mailto:schuster.wolfgang@gmail.com> wrote:

...

...

Am 08.12.2014 um 17:41 schrieb j. van den hoff :

hi list,

new to `context' and my first question to the list: how can I achieve the following (`latex') behaviour:

\newcommand{\km}{\ensuremath{K_m}} We can now use \km\ in the body text as well as in this \begin{equation} \km = 1 \end{equation} display equation.

in `context'? I've tried something like

\def\km{\math{K_m}} We can now use \km\ in the body text but get sytnax errors when putting it in this \startformula \km = 1 \stopformula formula.

but this fails for obvious reasons (as would using `$$' instead of `ensuremath' in the `latex' case).

so what I need is a way of defining (potentially complex) math-expressions via some shortcuts/definitions/macros/abbreviations (whatever) which I can then use in the formula environment (or whatever it's called in `context'...) as well as in the body text.

any help appreciated,

In ConTeXt you have to write

\define\km{\mathematics{K_m}}

but there is not much to gain from this because you can enter math mode in the text with \m{…}.

thanks for the response. in my silly example you are right (but even there it saves more than 50% of keystrokes). but I'm thinking of course of more tedious math expressions where it rapidly is handy to use such abbreviations -- the more so, if you have, say, 20 different ones appearing repeatedly in the document. but that would work with the `\def..\math' construct in the body text. what does _not_ work, then, is to use the definition in a display (\startformula...\stopformula) equation (which it _does_ in latex when isolating the math expression with `ensuremath'). so my real question(s) are:

1. is there any way to achieve the same functionality in `context' (expansion of math-containing defintion/macro/abbreviation in text _and_ math environment? if yes, how would I do this?

2. if no, would it be sensible (and feasible) to modify `\math' behaviour and to make it aware of whether it is called from within text or from within a display equation (in which case it should do nothing...), i.e. mkae it behave like `\ensuremath' in latex?

1 + 2: \define\Foo{\mathematics{f(x)}} \define\Bar{\mathortext {f(x)}{\m{g(x)}}} \starttext a \Foo\ \Bar\ b \startformula \Foo\ \Bar \stopformula \stoptext Wolfgang