On Mon, May 09, 2005 at 11:13:12PM +0200, Helge Hafting wrote:
> On Mon, May 09, 2005 at 08:58:56PM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> > On Mon, May 09, 2005 at 12:40:04PM +0200, Helge Hafting wrote:
> > > There is a way around this, if tex seems too limiting. A lyx macro
> > > doesn't have to have a corresponding tex macro. Lyx could simply
> > > expand "lyx-macros" itself when exporting tex, instead of outputting a
> > > tex macro. That'd allow more than 10 arguments, and avoid any other
> > > tex-specific limitation as well.
> >
> > Sure enough.
> >
> > > I don't know if it is worth the trouble though.
> >
> > We are going to need some 'light' implementation of that anyway when
> > going to XML (aka non-TeX-math). So this is already somehow on the radar
> > screen. Not to mention the current ugly macro interface.
> >
> I see one problem - the roundtrip lyx->tex->lyx will be harder
> without tex macros. You'll get all macros expanded on reimport,
> unless lyx tries to find "repeating sequences". That is a hard problem
> though, and might cause unwanted macros to appear too.
We can always output
%% begin LyX defined macros
\def\lyxmacroA{...}
\def\lyxmacroB{...}
\def\lyxmacroC{...}
%% end LyX defined macros
...
$a+\lyxmacroB+...$
i.e. output some formula in TeX syntax which maps to the internal
representation almost 1:1.
> > But I somehow doubt it will be my doing, so if anybody is interested
> > to spend some time here in the 1.5 cycle...
>
> If I'll be able to spare some time, then charstyles and possibly a
> style editor is the things I'd like to work on for 1.5. And then
> there's unicode support . . .
Pretty much on the agenda already after 1.4...
Andre'
