Re: [NTG-context] Substack in Context
Taco Hoekwater wrote:
Does this look ok?
(code is not production-ready yet, but seems reasonable to me)
Taco
\def\startsubstack
{\begingroup
\null
\vcenter\bgroup
\pushmacro\domatrixNC
\let\endmath\relax
\def\NC{\domatrixNC}%
\def\MC{\domatrixNC\ifmmode\else$\def\endmath{$}\fi}%
\global\let\domatrixNC\dodomatrixNC
\def\NR{\endmath%
\global\let\domatrixNC\dodomatrixNC
\vadjust{\kern -.33\bodyfontsize}\crcr}%
\mathsurround\zeropoint
\everycr\emptytoks
\halign\bgroup \hfil$\scriptstyle ##$\hfil\crcr }
\def\stopsubstack
{\crcr
\egroup
\popmacro\domatrixNC
\egroup
\endgroup}
without vadjust: (mathstrut + nointerlineskip)
\def\startsubstack
{\begingroup
\null
\vcenter\bgroup
\pushmacro\domatrixNC
\let\stopmathmode\relax % to be sure, will go away
\def\NC{\domatrixNC}%
\def\MC{\domatrixNC\startmathmode}%
\global\let\domatrixNC\dodomatrixNC
\def\NR{\stopmathmode
\global\let\domatrixNC\dodomatrixNC
\crcr\noalign{\nointerlineskip}}%
\mathsurround\zeropoint
\everycr\emptytoks
\halign\bgroup\hfil$\scriptstyle\mathstrut##$\hfil\crcr }
\def\stopsubstack
{\crcr
\egroup
\popmacro\domatrixNC
\egroup
\endgroup}
\starttext
\startformula
\sum_{%
\startsubstack
i = 1 \NR
i \neq n \NR
i \neq m
\stopsubstack
}a_i
\stopformula
\stoptext
Aditya Mahajan wrote:
--- On Jan 28, Taco Hoekwater wrote ---
Aditya Mahajan wrote:
The definition from m-newmat is at least partly superceded by the
new core math definitions Hans added last week, so a new implementation
would be better.
Can you suggest something?
Like this maybe?
\def\substack#1%
{\begingroup
\let\\\cr
\startmathmatrix #1\stopmathmatrix
\endgroup}
Probably needs a bit of tweaking to make it look better
(perhaps a [strut=no] parameter?).
--- On Jan 28, Vit Zyka wrote ---
What about use math primitive \atop:
\def\substack#1%
{\begingroup
\let\\\atop
#1
\endgroup}
Sorry for not getting back for almost a month. Both suggestions work
only partially. Consider
\startmathformula
\sum_{%
\startmathmatrix
i = 1 \NR i \neq n \NR i \neq m
\stopmathmatrix
}a_i
\stopformula
As Taco mentioned, the spacing is bad.
\atop gives correct spacing but you need to put subscripts in groups
of two.
\startformula
\sum_{ {i = 1 \atop i \neq n}\atop i \neq m } a_i
\stopformula
Moreover, the font size is incorrect in both cases. Compare with the
size of the subscript in \sum_{i = 1}.
Any suggestions?
Aditya
___
ntg-context mailing list
ntg-context@ntg.nl
http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
___
ntg-context mailing list
ntg-context@ntg.nl
http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
--
-
Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com
| www.pragma-pod.nl
-
___
ntg-context mailing list
ntg-context@ntg.nl
http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
Re: [NTG-context] Substack in Context
--- On Jan 28, Taco Hoekwater wrote ---
Aditya Mahajan wrote:
The definition from m-newmat is at least partly superceded by the
new core math definitions Hans added last week, so a new implementation
would be better.
Can you suggest something?
Like this maybe?
\def\substack#1%
{\begingroup
\let\\\cr
\startmathmatrix #1\stopmathmatrix
\endgroup}
Probably needs a bit of tweaking to make it look better
(perhaps a [strut=no] parameter?).
--- On Jan 28, Vit Zyka wrote ---
What about use math primitive \atop:
\def\substack#1%
{\begingroup
\let\\\atop
#1
\endgroup}
Sorry for not getting back for almost a month. Both suggestions work
only partially. Consider
\startmathformula
\sum_{%
\startmathmatrix
i = 1 \NR i \neq n \NR i \neq m
\stopmathmatrix
}a_i
\stopformula
As Taco mentioned, the spacing is bad.
\atop gives correct spacing but you need to put subscripts in groups
of two.
\startformula
\sum_{ {i = 1 \atop i \neq n}\atop i \neq m } a_i
\stopformula
Moreover, the font size is incorrect in both cases. Compare with the
size of the subscript in \sum_{i = 1}.
Any suggestions?
Aditya
___
ntg-context mailing list
ntg-context@ntg.nl
http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
Re: [NTG-context] Substack in Context
Does this look ok?
(code is not production-ready yet, but seems reasonable to me)
Taco
\def\startsubstack
{\begingroup
\null
\vcenter\bgroup
\pushmacro\domatrixNC
\let\endmath\relax
\def\NC{\domatrixNC}%
\def\MC{\domatrixNC\ifmmode\else$\def\endmath{$}\fi}%
\global\let\domatrixNC\dodomatrixNC
\def\NR{\endmath%
\global\let\domatrixNC\dodomatrixNC
\vadjust{\kern -.33\bodyfontsize}\crcr}%
\mathsurround\zeropoint
\everycr\emptytoks
\halign\bgroup \hfil$\scriptstyle ##$\hfil\crcr }
\def\stopsubstack
{\crcr
\egroup
\popmacro\domatrixNC
\egroup
\endgroup}
\starttext
\startformula
\sum_{%
\startsubstack
i = 1 \NR
i \neq n \NR
i \neq m
\stopsubstack
}a_i
\stopformula
\stoptext
Aditya Mahajan wrote:
--- On Jan 28, Taco Hoekwater wrote ---
Aditya Mahajan wrote:
The definition from m-newmat is at least partly superceded by the
new core math definitions Hans added last week, so a new implementation
would be better.
Can you suggest something?
Like this maybe?
\def\substack#1%
{\begingroup
\let\\\cr
\startmathmatrix #1\stopmathmatrix
\endgroup}
Probably needs a bit of tweaking to make it look better
(perhaps a [strut=no] parameter?).
--- On Jan 28, Vit Zyka wrote ---
What about use math primitive \atop:
\def\substack#1%
{\begingroup
\let\\\atop
#1
\endgroup}
Sorry for not getting back for almost a month. Both suggestions work
only partially. Consider
\startmathformula
\sum_{%
\startmathmatrix
i = 1 \NR i \neq n \NR i \neq m
\stopmathmatrix
}a_i
\stopformula
As Taco mentioned, the spacing is bad.
\atop gives correct spacing but you need to put subscripts in groups
of two.
\startformula
\sum_{ {i = 1 \atop i \neq n}\atop i \neq m } a_i
\stopformula
Moreover, the font size is incorrect in both cases. Compare with the
size of the subscript in \sum_{i = 1}.
Any suggestions?
Aditya
___
ntg-context mailing list
ntg-context@ntg.nl
http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
___
ntg-context mailing list
ntg-context@ntg.nl
http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
Re: [NTG-context] Substack in Context
--- On Feb 22, Taco Hoekwater wrote --- Does this look ok? (code is not production-ready yet, but seems reasonable to me) [code snipped] Yes, looks good to my eyes. Thanks a lot. Aditya -- Aditya Mahajan, EECS Systems, University of Michigan http://www.eecs.umich.edu/~adityam || Ph: 7342624008 ___ ntg-context mailing list ntg-context@ntg.nl http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
Re: [NTG-context] Substack in Context
Vit Zyka wrote:
What about use math primitive \atop:
\def\substack#1%
{\begingroup
\let\\\atop
#1
\endgroup}
There can be more then two lines of subscripts.
Cheers, taco
___
ntg-context mailing list
ntg-context@ntg.nl
http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
Re: [NTG-context] Substack in Context
Aditya Mahajan wrote:
Hi,
What is the context equivalent of latex's substack? How do I type the
following
$$
\sum_{\substack i \in P \\ j \in Q} a_{ij}
$$
Where is that defined? LateX gives me and 'Undefined control sequence',
and with \usepackage{amsmath} I get no error, but not a stack either.
The definition from m-newmat is at least partly superceded by the
new core math definitions Hans added last week, so a new implementation
would be better.
Cheers,
Taco
___
ntg-context mailing list
ntg-context@ntg.nl
http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
Re: [NTG-context] Substack in Context
--- On Jan 28, Taco Hoekwater wrote ---
Aditya Mahajan wrote:
Hi,
What is the context equivalent of latex's substack? How do I type the
following
$$
\sum_{\substack i \in P \\ j \in Q} a_{ij}
$$
Where is that defined? LateX gives me and 'Undefined control sequence',
and with \usepackage{amsmath} I get no error, but not a stack either.
This is defined in amsmath. Sorry, I made a mistake in typing. It
should be
$$
\sum_{\substack{ a \\ b}} c
$$
The definition from m-newmat is at least partly superceded by the
new core math definitions Hans added last week, so a new implementation
would be better.
Can you suggest something?
--
Aditya Mahajan, EECS Systems, University of Michigan
http://www.eecs.umich.edu/~adityam || Ph: 7342624008
___
ntg-context mailing list
ntg-context@ntg.nl
http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
Re: [NTG-context] Substack in Context
Aditya Mahajan wrote:
The definition from m-newmat is at least partly superceded by the
new core math definitions Hans added last week, so a new implementation
would be better.
Can you suggest something?
Like this maybe?
\def\substack#1%
{\begingroup
\let\\\cr
\startmathmatrix #1\stopmathmatrix
\endgroup}
Probably needs a bit of tweaking to make it look better
(perhaps a [strut=no] parameter?).
Cheers ,taco
___
ntg-context mailing list
ntg-context@ntg.nl
http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
Re: [NTG-context] Substack in Context
Taco Hoekwater wrote:
Aditya Mahajan wrote:
The definition from m-newmat is at least partly superceded by the
new core math definitions Hans added last week, so a new implementation
would be better.
Can you suggest something?
Like this maybe?
\def\substack#1%
{\begingroup
\let\\\cr
\startmathmatrix #1\stopmathmatrix
\endgroup}
Probably needs a bit of tweaking to make it look better
(perhaps a [strut=no] parameter?).
What about use math primitive \atop:
\def\substack#1%
{\begingroup
\let\\\atop
#1
\endgroup}
Vit
___
ntg-context mailing list
ntg-context@ntg.nl
http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
[NTG-context] Substack in Context
Hi,
What is the context equivalent of latex's substack? How do I type the
following
$$
\sum_{\substack i \in P \\ j \in Q} a_{ij}
$$
I search on source browser shows that this command was defined in
newmat but pruned out. Is there a replacement for it? Is it safe to
simply copy the definitions from m-newmat.tex and use them in my
project?
Thanks
Aditya
--
Aditya Mahajan, EECS Systems, University of Michigan
http://www.eecs.umich.edu/~adityam || Ph: 7342624008
___
ntg-context mailing list
ntg-context@ntg.nl
http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
