this instead of
that'
as you're playing with it ... there is a lot we haven't yet introduced
but we will do that stepwise .. here's one
inline formulas like $(x + a + 2)$ will break across lines but
traditionally \left( .. \right) doesn't which is why these \bigg things
are there : manual
to split long table in two pages. Is there a similar
way for long formula?
Here is a minimal example.
\showframe
\starttext
\dorecurse{3}{\input knuth}
\startformula\startalign
\NC S_1 \NC = 1 = 1 + 0 \bigg( \frac{1}{2}\bigg),
\NR
\NC S_2 \NC = 1 + \frac{1}{2} = 1
the
version with \bigl and \bigr has a different size than the other ones.
So my question boils down to: Is it possible, by using fences, to have the
same size as the \big, \Big, \bigg etc would give?
If not, is it possible to implement? I think it would make the already very
nice fencin
On 4/25/2018 7:29 AM, Mikael P. Sundqvist wrote:
On Sat, Apr 21, 2018 at 7:30 PM, Mikael P. Sundqvist <mic...@gmail.com
<mailto:mic...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Dear Hans and others,
I'm usually use the \big, \Big, \bigg etc to get the size of
parentheses, bracket
On Sat, Apr 21, 2018 at 7:30 PM, Mikael P. Sundqvist <mic...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Dear Hans and others,
>
> I'm usually use the \big, \Big, \bigg etc to get the size of parentheses,
> brackets and braces to be the size I want. I realize that the fences
> machinery is p
Dear Hans and others,
I'm usually use the \big, \Big, \bigg etc to get the size of parentheses,
brackets and braces to be the size I want. I realize that the fences
machinery is probably a cleaner way of doing this.
I tried it a bit, and it usually gives the result I like. But sometimes
[delimiter=big] expands to \big\langle ... \big\rangle
\MEAN[delimiter=Big] expands to \Big\langle ... \Big\rangle
\MEAN[delimiter=bigg] expands to \bigg\langle ... \bigg\rangle
\MEAN[delimiter=Bigg] expands to \Bigg\langle ... \Bigg\rangle
I am not sure whether `delimiter` is the best key. I think
\rangle
\MEAN[delimiter=Big] expands to \Big\langle ... \Big\rangle
\MEAN[delimiter=bigg] expands to \bigg\langle ... \bigg\rangle
\MEAN[delimiter=Bigg] expands to \Bigg\langle ... \Bigg\rangle
I am not sure whether `delimiter` is the best key. I think that
`scale`
may be better, but using `scale
to \Big\langle ... \Big\rangle
\MEAN[delimiter=bigg] expands to \bigg\langle ... \bigg\rangle
\MEAN[delimiter=Bigg] expands to \Bigg\langle ... \Bigg\rangle
I am not sure whether `delimiter` is the best key. I think that `scale`
may be better, but using `scale` for specifying the scaling of math
=bigg] expands to \bigg\langle ... \bigg\rangle
\MEAN[delimiter=Bigg] expands to \Bigg\langle ... \Bigg\rangle
I am not sure whether `delimiter` is the best key. I think that `scale`
may be better, but using `scale` for specifying the scaling of math
delimiters will be inconsistent with how `scale
.. \rangle
\MEAN[size=big] expands to \big\langle ... \big\rangle
\MEAN[size=Big] expands to \Big\langle ... \Big\rangle
\MEAN[size=bigg] expands to \bigg\langle ... \bigg\rangle
\MEAN[size=Bigg] expands to \Bigg\langle ... \Bigg\rangle
with integrals we have factor as key ... anyway, i'll
\langle ... \big\rangle
\MEAN[size=Big] expands to \Big\langle ... \Big\rangle
\MEAN[size=bigg] expands to \bigg\langle ... \bigg\rangle
\MEAN[size=Bigg] expands to \Bigg\langle ... \Bigg\rangle
Best regards: OK
> On 6 Mar 2017, at 20:57, Aditya Mahajan <adit...@umich.edu> wrote:
>
Hi Hans,
There are instances where the automatic scaling provided by \left and
\right is not ideal and one has to use manual scaling. For example:
\starttext
\startTEXpage \startformula
\left\langle \sum_{i=1}^n A_i x_i \right\rangle
\hbox{ vs. }
\bigg\langle \sum_{i=1}^n A_i x_i \bigg
Mr Hagen, is it the expected behaviour?
\starttext
The delimiters are correctly displayed:
\startformula
\left\lfloor \frac{x}{y}\right\rfloor
\stopformula
The delimiters vanish:
\startformula
\Bigl\lfloor \frac{x}{y}\Bigr\rfloor
\stopformula
\stoptext
Maggyero
MWE:
\starttext
The delimiters are correctly displayed:
\startformula
\left\lfloor \frac{x}{y}\right\rfloor
\stopformula
The delimiters vanish:
\startformula
\Bigl\lfloor \frac{x}{y}\Bigr\rfloor
\stopformula
\stoptext
Maggyero
Dear NTG-ConTeXt members,
The math delimiters for floor and ceiling functions (\lfloor, \rfloor,
\lceil, \rceil) work with the automatic scaling commands (\left and \right)
but vanish with the manual scaling commands (\big, \Big, \bigg, \Bigg,
\bigl, \Bigl, \biggl, \Biggl, \bigr, \Bigr, \biggr
On 1/12/2013 10:37 PM, Wolfgang Werners-Lucchini wrote:
Hallo,
the following was ok with mkII:
% coding: utf-8
\def\B{\vphantom{\bigg)}}
\setupbodyfont[11pt,sans]
\starttext
\startitemize[a,columns,three,joinedup][grid=no,width=8mm,right=)]
\item $\B 5b\cdot (3a+4b-5c)$
\item $\B 3xy\cdot (2x
Hallo,
the following was ok with mkII:
% coding: utf-8
\def\B{\vphantom{\bigg)}}
\setupbodyfont[11pt,sans]
\starttext
\startitemize[a,columns,three,joinedup][grid=no,width=8mm,right=)]
\item $\B 5b\cdot (3a+4b-5c)$
\item $\B 3xy\cdot (2x-6y-xy)$
\item $\B (-0{,}5x)\cdot (3y-5x)$
\item $\B (2z-3x
?
This
\starttext
$$\bigg\lgroup\dots\bigg\rgroup$$
\stoptext
is ok in MkII (ConTeXt ver: 2011.01.06) but when compiled with
MkIV (ConTeXt ver: 2010.07.30 11:35 and ver: 2010.07.30 11:35) the
delimiters are not shown. (By the way, the same holds true for
\rmoustache and \lmoustache.)
Am I missing
and \rgroup supported in MkIV?
This
\starttext
$$\bigg\lgroup\dots\bigg\rgroup$$
\stoptext
is ok in MkII (ConTeXt ver: 2011.01.06) but when compiled with
MkIV (ConTeXt ver: 2010.07.30 11:35 and ver: 2010.07.30 11:35) the
delimiters are not shown. (By the way, the same holds true for
\rmoustache
{\@@dobig{1.080}}
% \def\LBRbigg {\@@dobig{1.342}}
% \def\LBRBigg {\@@dobig{1.603}}
% \def\LBRbiggg{\@@dobig{1.772}}
% \def\LBRBiggg{\@@dobig{2.125}}
I think the second set of parameters( the commented one) is correct.
or \big,\bigg, etc will produce huge delimiters...
Yue Wang
Hi,
are the delimiters \lgroup and \rgroup supported in MkIV?
This
\starttext
$$\bigg\lgroup\dots\bigg\rgroup$$
\stoptext
is ok in MkII (ConTeXt ver: 2011.01.06) but when compiled with MkIV
(ConTeXt ver: 2010.07.30 11:35 and ver: 2010.07.30 11:35) the delimiters
are not shown. (By the way
On Sat, 8 Jan 2011, Daniel Schopper wrote:
Hi,
are the delimiters \lgroup and \rgroup supported in MkIV?
This
\starttext
$$\bigg\lgroup\dots\bigg\rgroup$$
\stoptext
is ok in MkII (ConTeXt ver: 2011.01.06) but when compiled with MkIV (ConTeXt
ver: 2010.07.30 11:35 and ver: 2010.07.30 11:35
On Sat, Jan 08, 2011 at 12:52:38PM -0500, Aditya Mahajan wrote:
On Sat, 8 Jan 2011, Daniel Schopper wrote:
Hi,
are the delimiters \lgroup and \rgroup supported in MkIV?
This
\starttext
$$\bigg\lgroup\dots\bigg\rgroup$$
\stoptext
is ok in MkII (ConTeXt ver: 2011.01.06) but when
On Sat, Jan 08, 2011 at 09:35:09PM +0200, Khaled Hosny wrote:
On Sat, Jan 08, 2011 at 12:52:38PM -0500, Aditya Mahajan wrote:
On Sat, 8 Jan 2011, Daniel Schopper wrote:
Hi,
are the delimiters \lgroup and \rgroup supported in MkIV?
This
\starttext
$$\bigg\lgroup\dots\bigg\rgroup
On Sat, 8 Jan 2011, Khaled Hosny wrote:
On Sat, Jan 08, 2011 at 12:52:38PM -0500, Aditya Mahajan wrote:
On Sat, 8 Jan 2011, Daniel Schopper wrote:
Hi,
are the delimiters \lgroup and \rgroup supported in MkIV?
This
\starttext
$$\bigg\lgroup\dots\bigg\rgroup$$
\stoptext
is ok in MkII
?
This
\starttext
$$\bigg\lgroup\dots\bigg\rgroup$$
\stoptext
is ok in MkII (ConTeXt ver: 2011.01.06) but when compiled with
MkIV (ConTeXt ver: 2010.07.30 11:35 and ver: 2010.07.30 11:35) the
delimiters are not shown. (By the way, the same holds true for
\rmoustache and \lmoustache.)
Am I missing
and \rgroup supported in MkIV?
This
\starttext
$$\bigg\lgroup\dots\bigg\rgroup$$
\stoptext
is ok in MkII (ConTeXt ver: 2011.01.06) but when compiled with
MkIV (ConTeXt ver: 2010.07.30 11:35 and ver: 2010.07.30 11:35) the
delimiters are not shown. (By the way, the same holds true for
\rmoustache
On Sat, 8 Jan 2011, Khaled Hosny wrote:
On Sat, Jan 08, 2011 at 12:52:38PM -0500, Aditya Mahajan wrote:
On Sat, 8 Jan 2011, Daniel Schopper wrote:
Hi,
are the delimiters \lgroup and \rgroup supported in MkIV?
This
\starttext
$$\bigg\lgroup\dots\bigg\rgroup$$
\stoptext
is ok in MkII
\big \bigg \Big and \Bigg has no effect in Mkiv with opentype math fonts.
___
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the
Wiki!
maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl
:
$\Bigg(\bigg(\Big(\big((..).\big)..\Big)\bigg)..\Bigg)$
Regards,
Khaled
--
Khaled Hosny
Arabic localiser and member of Arabeyes.org team
Free font developer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
What about:
$\Bigg(\bigg(\Big(\big((..).\big)..\Big)\bigg)..\Bigg)$
Regards,
Khaled
thanks for your reply, but i would like to have it done automatically,
not by hand; something like a switch for parentheses mode.
also i´m not sure if those \big( parentheses vary their size according
comm...@googlemail.com wrote:
What about:
$\Bigg(\bigg(\Big(\big((..).\big)..\Big)\bigg)..\Bigg)$
Regards,
Khaled
thanks for your reply, but i would like to have it done automatically,
not by hand; something like a switch for parentheses mode.
also i´m not sure if those \big
\bigg({\Wt\over\Vp} \Tp \bigg)\cr}
\stopformula
\stoptext
Minimal example: In MkII 2009.04.17
\starttext
$\bigg($
\stoptext
gives
! Missing number, treated as zero.
to be read again
$
\@@dobig ...o #1\bodyfontsize {}\right @space
}
\starttext
\placeformula
\startformula
\eqalign{
\Pt = \Prob \left( {\Timp\over\Tp}1 \right)\cr
=\Prob \bigg({\Wt\over\Vp} \Tp \bigg)\cr}
\stopformula
\stoptext
Yue Wang
___
If your question is of interest to others as well
T}}
\def\Vp{V_{\rm p}^\prime}
\starttext
\placeformula
\startformula
\eqalign{
\Pt = \Prob \left( {\Timp\over\Tp}1 \right)\cr
=\Prob \bigg({\Wt\over\Vp} \Tp \bigg)\cr}
\stopformula
\stoptext
Minimal example: In MkII 2009.04.17
\starttext
$\bigg($
\stoptext
gives
! Missing number, treated
^1_t \NR
\NC l^1_t \in \FSPACE L^1_t \NR
\NC g^2_t \in \FSPACE G^2_t \NR
\NC l^2_t \in \FSPACE L^2_t \NR
\stopsubstack}}}
\Bigg[ \NC
\hat {Ï}_t \bigg( \big(
\3 Q_t(g^2_t) â \2 Q_t(l^1_t) â \1 Q_t(g^1_t)\bigg) \1 Ï_t
{\vphantom{\big)}} (replace \big by \bigg, \Big, to suit
your need). If you really want something big you can try
\def\bigmathstrut{\vphantom{\frac{\displaystyle\sum_{(}^{)}}{\displaystyle\sum_{)}^{(}}}
Usually things do not grow bigger than this.
Aditya
If I change \left and \right to \big, it compiles successfully. But I
think \left and \right are more convenient. Are there some solutions to
use \left and \right in this situation ?
The easier way is to use manual scaling, for example use \big, \bigg,
\Big, \Bigg or you can have a more fine
Quoting Aditya Mahajan [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
The easier way is to use manual scaling, for example use \big, \bigg,
\Big, \Bigg or you can have a more fine-tuned control by
\protected\def\domathbig{\@@dobig}
Oops, that should be
\unprotected\def\
\unprotected is same as surrounding
\}$
No. In fact, this is how they are defined in core-mat.tex
\def\@@dobig#1#2%
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
\def\big {\@@dobig{0.85}}
\def\Big {\@@dobig{1.15}}
\def\bigg{\@@dobig{1.45}}
\def\Bigg{\@@dobig{1.75}}
math-tex redefines \big etc, but it is just a cosmetic change.
\def\PLAINbig {\@@dobig{0.85
)
/braceleftbig
/bracerightbig
the fonts themselves are ok
For my document, I changed the sizes to \bigg (or normal size).
Aditya
--
Aditya Mahajan, EECS Systems, University of Michigan
http://www.eecs.umich.edu/~adityam || Ph: 7342624008
___
ntg-context mailing
for example and \longrightleftharpoons also don't
look as they should.
In plain TeX it is possible to say \big\downarrow or \Bigg\downarrow
and the arrow is as long as desired. I neither do understand how this
mechanism works nor did I found out how \downharpoonright was defined
(which font
43 matches
Mail list logo
