On Sat, 12 Jan 2008 12:59:39 -0500 (EST) Aditya Mahajan wrote:

Why does \textunderscore wail? \textunderscore should work fine.

See https://mail.gna.org/public/muse-el-discuss/2008-01/msg00001.html thread.

:) This is how it is done in plain TeX, and both LaTeX and ConTeXt follow this. If you do not use maths at all, you can say

\catcode`\_ = 11

on the top of your file and then _ will be a letter in both text and math mode (which basically means that you will have to use \sb to get subscript in math mode.

Hmm, not ideal...

It is possible to define something along the lines of underscore.sty in latex, so that _ is treated as a letter in text mode, and as a subscript indicator in math mode, but, read below.

I do not remember having ever problem with underscore in LaTeX.

Shouldn't such function names be written as \type{gtk_xxxx} when muse converts the document to ConTeXt? In that case the _ will be preserved.

Right. They will fix default in muse and use \type{_} as value for underscore. Thank you for your input. Sincerely, Gour

Aditya Mahajan wrote:

:) This is how it is done in plain TeX, and both LaTeX and ConTeXt follow this. If you do not use maths at all, you can say

\catcode`\_ = 11

or ... \nonknuthmode (there's also \donkunthmode -) ----------------------------------------------------------------- Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com | www.pragma-pod.nl -----------------------------------------------------------------

Le 13 janvier à 23:47:12 Hans Hagen écrit notamment: | Aditya Mahajan wrote:

| > :) This is how it is done in plain TeX, and both LaTeX and ConTeXt follow | > this. If you do not use maths at all, you can say | > | > \catcode`\_ = 11

| or ...

| \nonknuthmode

| (there's also \donkunthmode -)

[...] As far as I can see, \nonknuthmode_ or \nonknuthmode{_} produces a wider "_" than \textunderscore{} does. -- Jean