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

j. van den hoff veedeehjay at googlemail.com
Tue Dec 9 13:36:53 CET 2014

On Tue, 09 Dec 2014 10:05:22 +0100, Wolfgang Schuster  
<schuster.wolfgang at gmail.com> wrote:

>> Am 09.12.2014 um 09:59 schrieb j. van den hoff  
>> <veedeehjay at googlemail.com>:
>> On Tue, 09 Dec 2014 09:42:03 +0100, Wolfgang Schuster  
>> <schuster.wolfgang at gmail.com <mailto:schuster.wolfgang at gmail.com>>  
>> wrote:
>>>> Am 08.12.2014 um 17:41 schrieb j. van den hoff  
>>>> <veedeehjay at googlemail.com>:
>>>> 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

feeling silly: now it works (so there was no real problem in the first  
place...), but previously I definitely got syntax errors when compiling if  
the `\def'
was used in the display equation (no idea, why, but I must have overlooked  
some dumb typo or similar). anyway, sorry for the noise and thanks again...

since I'm really new to `context': are there any potential problems with  
inserting white space in `\define' lines like `\define \Foo {  
\mathematics{f(x)} }' which I might miss? `context' seems to ignore them  
and they don't creep into the formatted output AFAICS (which is good).


ps: `\mathortext' is nice. should this not be in the manuals/documentation  
somewhere? it seems it is not ...

> Wolfgang

Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/

More information about the ntg-context mailing list