[NTG-context] One-off theorem titles

Wolfgang Schuster schuster.wolfgang at googlemail.com
Fri Mar 4 19:05:14 CET 2011


Am 04.03.2011 um 11:33 schrieb Hans Hagen:

>>> I don’t like the __ and ___ either but do you know a better way for good
>>> names without using do, dodo, nodo, yes or nop?
> 
> we can have module_do_bla or module_x_bla module_xx_bla etc

I think module_bla, module_bla_do, module_bla_redo etc. is better

>> I find that \module__command and \module___command are hard to
>> distinguish. For helper macros, a better idea might be:
>> 
>> \module_command
>> \module_command!
>> \module_command!!
> 
> or
> 
> \module_!_command
> \module_!!_command

In which are these alternatives are better than my module__command, you replace only the _ by !

>> These commands are easy to distinguish visually. But this will not work
>> for too well for three or four levels. I think that none of the schemes
>> look good for three or four levels. Perhaps we could mix both existing
>> schemes to get something reasonable:
>> 
>> \module_command
>> \module_command!
>> \module_command!do
>> \module_command!redo
>> 
>> or maybe
>> 
>> \module_command
>> \module_command_one
>> \module_command_two
>> \module_command_three
> 
> or
> 
> \module_command_a
> \module_command_b
> \module_command_aa (used by _a)

+1

> etc
> 
> actually we can use ^ if we want:
> 
> \module_^_command
> \module_^^_command

Just another form of module_!_command or module__command.

Wolfgang



More information about the ntg-context mailing list