Martin Rubey wrote:
>
> Waldek Hebisch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I am for improving TeX output. However I think that the patch has
> > two problems:
> >
> > - AFAIK \frac is LaTeX only, so this will brake plain TeX output.
> > \over works both for LaTeX and plain TeX. Breaking plain TeX
> > is bad idea, so if we really want \frac in LaTeX we probably
> > should have special flag to trigger such transformations.
> >
> > - the patch above changes already generated operator, it is probably
> > better to generate '\sp' and '\frac' few lines earlier. Also,
> > change breaks test for '\over' in the following line.
> >
>
> I think we should have TEXFORM as well as LATEXFORM, which can probably share
> some code by package calling TEXFORM from LATEXFORM. This should make
> intentions clear and should avoid further discussions.
>
I proposed a flag to avoid code duplication. We already had a few
cases where "the same" bug had to be fixed both in TeX and MathML.
MathML is probably different enough from TeX to justify separate
code. I am affraid that package calling from LATEXFORM to TEXFORM
are not enough to avoid duplication -- once you get into TEXFORM
you forget that you really want LaTeX. So we probably need
something like:
TeXorLaTeXFormat(isLatex : Boolean) ==
-- all routines are here
...
TeXFormat() == TeXorLaTeXFormat(false)
LaTeXFormat() == TeXorLaTeXFormat(true)
--
Waldek Hebisch
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"FriCAS - computer algebra system" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/fricas-devel?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
