[NTG-context] ! error: (nodes): attempt to double-free math_char node 100300, ignored

Hans Hagen j.hagen at xs4all.nl
Mon Apr 30 17:45:28 CEST 2018

On 4/30/2018 4:59 PM, Ulrike Fischer wrote:
> Am Mon, 30 Apr 2018 15:49:11 +0200 schrieb Hans Hagen:
>>> While discussion the issue with the unicode-math maintainer the
>>> question came up if mathalphabets like \mathrm etc should better use
>>> mode=node or mode=base. Do you have recommendation?
>> not really as i have no clue how he implements math alphabets
> Imho like in traditional tex as new math family with \newfam etc.

in that case only base mode will work as there is no callback doing text 
there (makes no sense)
>  From the output there is a clear difference, only with base mode one
> gets ligatures and kerning.
> $\mathtestnode{VA fin}$   (node mode: without ligature and kerning)
> $\mathtestbase{VA fin}$   (base mode: with ligature and kerning)
> But I'm not sure which output is the typographically sounder one.
if one needs text in math then using a boxed approach calling some real 
text fonts makes more sense


                                           Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
               Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
        tel: 038 477 53 69 | www.pragma-ade.nl | www.pragma-pod.nl

More information about the ntg-context mailing list