\setupmathradical[sqrt] crunches denominator in an \over fraction
I have been trying out the newish \setupmathradical[sqrt][alternative=mp], which has been very nice because of the fine control over the radical sign. I've noticed that it crunches the denominator in \sqrt{a\over b} For example: \starttext \placeformula\startformula \sqrt{k\over m}\quad \sqrt{\displaystyle{k\over m}} \stopformula \setupmathradical[sqrt][alternative=mp] \placeformula\startformula \sqrt{k\over m}\quad \sqrt{\displaystyle{k\over m}} \stopformula \stoptext In the first line, the fractions come out fine. In the second line, the first k\over m has a small, inline-math m in the denominator but a display-math k in the numerator. The second sqrt is fine. Is the problem that my plain-TeX habits, from decades using \over, should be over, and that \frac is the recommended way? (This is with the 2014.03.27 beta.) -Sanjoy
On 4/22/2014 1:53 AM, Sanjoy Mahajan wrote:
I have been trying out the newish \setupmathradical[sqrt][alternative=mp], which has been very nice because of the fine control over the radical sign.
I've noticed that it crunches the denominator in \sqrt{a\over b} For example:
\starttext \placeformula\startformula \sqrt{k\over m}\quad \sqrt{\displaystyle{k\over m}} \stopformula
\setupmathradical[sqrt][alternative=mp]
\placeformula\startformula \sqrt{k\over m}\quad \sqrt{\displaystyle{k\over m}} \stopformula
\stoptext
In the first line, the fractions come out fine. In the second line, the first k\over m has a small, inline-math m in the denominator but a display-math k in the numerator. The second sqrt is fine.
Is the problem that my plain-TeX habits, from decades using \over, should be over, and that \frac is the recommended way?
indeed. this is what (sort of) happens in case of a plugged in renderer: \sqrt{#1} -> ...\mathstylehbox{#1}... -> ...\hbox{\stylecommand #1}... when #a = a \over b the style gets applied to the a only as \over creates two (pseudo) groups i.e. the \over isolates a and b
\sqrt{{k\over m}}\quad \sqrt{\displaystyle{k\over m}}
would work ok 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 -----------------------------------------------------------------
Hans Hagen
indeed. this is what (sort of) happens in case of a plugged in renderer:
\sqrt{#1} -> ...\mathstylehbox{#1}... -> ...\hbox{\stylecommand #1}...
when #a = a \over b the style gets applied to the a only as \over creates two (pseudo) groups i.e. the \over isolates a and b
\sqrt{{k\over m}}\quad \sqrt{\displaystyle{k\over m}}
would work ok
Ah, I understand. The extra-braces solution, \sqrt{{k\over m}}, is simple and I can retain my \over habits. -Sanjoy
participants (2)
-
Hans Hagen
-
Sanjoy Mahajan