My mistake: When editing set.mm, I inadvertently deleted the $t I would still request that one $t comment be allowed per file, so my errors would be confined to my .mm files rather than added latexdef commands to set.mm.
--Brian On Sunday, September 19, 2021 at 9:35:46 PM UTC-5 Brian Larson wrote: > I'm trying to generate LaTeX of my definitions and theorems. My .mm file > reads set.mm. > > I tried to put my latexdef statements in a $t comment in my .mm file, but > got complaints. > > So I have been appending my latexdef statements to the end of the $t > comment in set.mm--something I'd rather not do. > > I've successfully generated .tex output which I have copied into my > document. However, now I get an error message I do not understand: > > MM> open tex df.tex > > Created LaTeX output file "df.tex". > > Reading definitions from $t statement of bless-p.mm... > > ?Error: There is no $t command in the file "bless-p.mm". > > The file should have exactly one comment of the form $(...$t...$) with > > the LaTeX and HTML definitions between $t and $). > > ?There was an error in the $t comment's LaTeX/HTML definitions. > > MM> > Of course, there is no $t comment in my .mm file, and I didn't get such an > error previously. > > Q1) Are there plans to allow one $t comment per .mm file (even if they > import other .mm files)? > Q2) Are there suggestions what error my recent work introduced to cause > LaTeX generation to fail? > > --Brian > > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Metamath" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/metamath/88c2da80-012c-4012-8132-b4ceaa6b82a6n%40googlegroups.com.
