RE: user-defined functions (yet again)
Thank you Günter and Julien, you have helped me understand LyX better and suggested good workarounds.
RE: user-defined functions (yet again)
Thank you Günter and Julien, you have helped me understand LyX better and suggested good workarounds.
RE: user-defined functions (yet again)
Thank you Günter and Julien, you have helped me understand LyX better and suggested good workarounds.
user-defined functions (yet again)
I am fairly new to LyX. I have been disappointed to find that simple commands
defined via \newcommand and \DeclareMathOperator in the preamble (for example,
\newcommand{\sinc}{sinc}) appear as evil red text onscreen. In fact, they
look exactly the same as undefined (illegal!) commands. I got the impression
from the LyX manuals and user comments that LyX was pretty good at interpreting
and rendering user-defined commands. Have I misunderstood something, or am I
doing something wrong, or is there something wrong with my LyX installation?
(I realize there are several other threads with similar questions, but none of
them have a clear answer to this as far as I can tell.)
I am using LyX 1.6.7 on windows xp sp3.
RSB
Re: user-defined functions (yet again)
On 26/01/2011 2:33 PM, Bennink, Ryan S. wrote:
I am fairly new to LyX. I have been disappointed to find that simple commands defined
via \newcommand and \DeclareMathOperator in the preamble (for example,
\newcommand{\sinc}{sinc}) appear as evil red text onscreen. In fact, they
look exactly the same as undefined (illegal!) commands. I got the impression from the
LyX manuals and user comments that LyX was pretty good at interpreting and rendering
user-defined commands. Have I misunderstood something, or am I doing something wrong, or
is there something wrong with my LyX installation? (I realize there are several other
threads with similar questions, but none of them have a clear answer to this as far as I
can tell.)
I am using LyX 1.6.7 on windows xp sp3.
RSB
To help you search through the Math manual: the nomenclature that LyX
uses for this is math macro. The caveat is that you define math macros
in the body of the document, not in the preamble. All things in the
preamble are not parsed by LyX at all but simply passed on to the latex
process.
--
Julien
Re: user-defined functions (yet again)
Hi Ryan,
(list c.c.ed)
On 26/01/2011 4:33 PM, Bennink, Ryan S. wrote:
Thanks for the response Julien. I am starting to use math macros. But a
limitation of them is that I have to create them in LyX; they aren't
automatically generated when I import LaTeX files I have written by hand (which
I have a lot of!), and the result is a bunch of ugly formulas. One of the main
reasons I'm trying LyX is that it was claimed to be more compatible with raw
LaTeX than Scientific Word, which I have used for years.
I believe LyX will import your \newcommands and convert them to math
macros if the \newcommands appear after \begin{document}
Regarding the use of the preamble, section 15.2 Self-Defined Functions of the math manual says
that you can use the \DeclareMathOperator in the preamble to define your own named functions such that
the result is the same ... as with a predefined function, which I took to mean it would look
onscreen like a predefined function. But then there is the footnote which says self-defined functions
are displayed in red, predefined ones in black. If that means all LyX does is show the command name as
ERT, then in my opinion that is a somewhat weak (and somewhat misleading) feature.
That's a good point. I would recommend to send a message to the LyX
documentation team.
As a general note: LyX is free software and isn't backed up by any
company. Considering this, sometimes I find that what was accomplished
with LyX is quite amazing. However sometimes I find it is lacking a lot.
The great thing, though, is that it can be made better with such great
feedback like you already started to provide. And better yet you could
provide a patch which would properly import \newcommands from the
preamble of your .tex file into a .lyx doc.
First I was only a LyX user and then I started contributing to the
project when I saw that something was lacking. I would advise you the
same if you can, it will make LyX better and you can use it to import
your .tex files properly.
Cheers,
Julien
Re: user-defined functions (yet again)
On 26/01/2011 2:33 PM, Bennink, Ryan S. wrote:
I am fairly new to LyX. I have been disappointed to find that simple
commands defined via \newcommand and
\DeclareMathOperator in the preamble (for example, \newcommand{\sinc}{sinc})
appear as evil red
text onscreen. In fact, they look exactly the same as undefined (illegal!)
commands. I got the
impression from the LyX manuals and user comments that LyX was pretty good
at interpreting and rendering
user-defined commands. Have I misunderstood something, or am I doing
something wrong, or is there
something wrong with my LyX installation? (I realize there are several
other threads with similar
questions, but none of them have a clear answer to this as far as I can
tell.)
I am using LyX 1.6.7 on windows xp sp3.
RSB
To help you search through the Math manual: the nomenclature that LyX
uses for this is math macro. The caveat is that you define math macros
in the body of the document, not in the preamble. All things in the
preamble are not parsed by LyX at all but simply passed on to the latex
process.
Thanks for the response Julien. I am starting to use math macros. But a
limitation of them is that I have to create them in LyX; they aren't
automatically generated when I import LaTeX files I have written by hand
(which I have a lot of!), and the result is a bunch of ugly formulas. One of
the main reasons I'm trying LyX is that it was claimed to be more compatible
with raw LaTeX than Scientific Word, which I have used for years.
Regarding the use of the preamble, section 15.2 Self-Defined Functions of
the math manual says that you can use the \DeclareMathOperator in the preamble
to define your own named functions such that the result is the same ... as
with a predefined function, which I took to mean it would look onscreen like
a predefined function. But then there is the footnote which says self-defined
functions are displayed in red, predefined ones in black. If that means all
LyX does is show the command name as ERT, then in my opinion that is a
somewhat weak (and somewhat misleading) feature.
Ryan
RE: user-defined functions (yet again)
Thanks for the response Julien. I am starting to use math macros. But a
limitation of them is that I have to create them in LyX; they aren't
automatically generated when I import LaTeX files I have written by hand
(which I have a lot of!), and the result is a bunch of ugly formulas. One
of the main reasons I'm trying LyX is that it was claimed to be more
compatible with raw LaTeX than Scientific Word, which I have used for years.
I believe LyX will import your \newcommands and convert them to math
macros if the \newcommands appear after \begin{document}
Regarding the use of the preamble, section 15.2 Self-Defined Functions of
the math manual says that you can use the \DeclareMathOperator in the
preamble to define your own named functions such that the result is the
same ... as with a predefined function, which I took to mean it would look
onscreen like a predefined function. But then there is the footnote which
says self-defined functions are displayed in red, predefined ones in
black. If that means all LyX does is show the command name as ERT, then in
my opinion that is a somewhat weak (and somewhat misleading) feature.
That's a good point. I would recommend to send a message to the LyX
documentation team.
As a general note: LyX is free software and isn't backed up by any
company. Considering this, sometimes I find that what was accomplished
with LyX is quite amazing. However sometimes I find it is lacking a lot.
The great thing, though, is that it can be made better with such great
feedback like you already started to provide. And better yet you could
provide a patch which would properly import \newcommands from the
preamble of your .tex file into a .lyx doc.
First I was only a LyX user and then I started contributing to the
project when I saw that something was lacking. I would advise you the
same if you can, it will make LyX better and you can use it to import
your .tex files properly.
Cheers,
Julien
Thanks. I confirmed that \newcommand does work if it's within the document
environment, but not in the preamble (which seems odd to me, since the preamble
seems to be a pretty reasonable place to define commands). Also, it only works
if you import it, not if you enter it in manually from within LyX (again, not
something I expected, but perhaps understandable). Since LyX can handle
\newcommand, it shouldn't be hard to get \DeclareMathOperator to display nicely
also.
I am indeed impressed with what LyX can do, which is why I believe it can be
even better. I would love to contribute -- I actually had started planning out
something very similar to LyX about a decade ago -- but unfortunately I don't
have much spare time now. Maybe someday!
Ryan
Re: user-defined functions (yet again)
Ryan Bennink wrote: One of the main reasons I'm trying LyX is that it was claimed to be more compatible with raw LaTeX than Scientific Word, which I have used for years. can you share the source where from comes this claim? compatibilty with pure latex is one of the weakest point of lyx i would say and if you need to exchange pure .tex files regularly with other authors think twice before using lyx... pavel
user-defined functions (yet again)
I am fairly new to LyX. I have been disappointed to find that simple commands
defined via \newcommand and \DeclareMathOperator in the preamble (for example,
\newcommand{\sinc}{sinc}) appear as evil red text onscreen. In fact, they
look exactly the same as undefined (illegal!) commands. I got the impression
from the LyX manuals and user comments that LyX was pretty good at interpreting
and rendering user-defined commands. Have I misunderstood something, or am I
doing something wrong, or is there something wrong with my LyX installation?
(I realize there are several other threads with similar questions, but none of
them have a clear answer to this as far as I can tell.)
I am using LyX 1.6.7 on windows xp sp3.
RSB
Re: user-defined functions (yet again)
On 26/01/2011 2:33 PM, Bennink, Ryan S. wrote:
I am fairly new to LyX. I have been disappointed to find that simple commands defined
via \newcommand and \DeclareMathOperator in the preamble (for example,
\newcommand{\sinc}{sinc}) appear as evil red text onscreen. In fact, they
look exactly the same as undefined (illegal!) commands. I got the impression from the
LyX manuals and user comments that LyX was pretty good at interpreting and rendering
user-defined commands. Have I misunderstood something, or am I doing something wrong, or
is there something wrong with my LyX installation? (I realize there are several other
threads with similar questions, but none of them have a clear answer to this as far as I
can tell.)
I am using LyX 1.6.7 on windows xp sp3.
RSB
To help you search through the Math manual: the nomenclature that LyX
uses for this is math macro. The caveat is that you define math macros
in the body of the document, not in the preamble. All things in the
preamble are not parsed by LyX at all but simply passed on to the latex
process.
--
Julien
Re: user-defined functions (yet again)
Hi Ryan,
(list c.c.ed)
On 26/01/2011 4:33 PM, Bennink, Ryan S. wrote:
Thanks for the response Julien. I am starting to use math macros. But a
limitation of them is that I have to create them in LyX; they aren't
automatically generated when I import LaTeX files I have written by hand (which
I have a lot of!), and the result is a bunch of ugly formulas. One of the main
reasons I'm trying LyX is that it was claimed to be more compatible with raw
LaTeX than Scientific Word, which I have used for years.
I believe LyX will import your \newcommands and convert them to math
macros if the \newcommands appear after \begin{document}
Regarding the use of the preamble, section 15.2 Self-Defined Functions of the math manual says
that you can use the \DeclareMathOperator in the preamble to define your own named functions such that
the result is the same ... as with a predefined function, which I took to mean it would look
onscreen like a predefined function. But then there is the footnote which says self-defined functions
are displayed in red, predefined ones in black. If that means all LyX does is show the command name as
ERT, then in my opinion that is a somewhat weak (and somewhat misleading) feature.
That's a good point. I would recommend to send a message to the LyX
documentation team.
As a general note: LyX is free software and isn't backed up by any
company. Considering this, sometimes I find that what was accomplished
with LyX is quite amazing. However sometimes I find it is lacking a lot.
The great thing, though, is that it can be made better with such great
feedback like you already started to provide. And better yet you could
provide a patch which would properly import \newcommands from the
preamble of your .tex file into a .lyx doc.
First I was only a LyX user and then I started contributing to the
project when I saw that something was lacking. I would advise you the
same if you can, it will make LyX better and you can use it to import
your .tex files properly.
Cheers,
Julien
Re: user-defined functions (yet again)
On 26/01/2011 2:33 PM, Bennink, Ryan S. wrote:
I am fairly new to LyX. I have been disappointed to find that simple
commands defined via \newcommand and
\DeclareMathOperator in the preamble (for example, \newcommand{\sinc}{sinc})
appear as evil red
text onscreen. In fact, they look exactly the same as undefined (illegal!)
commands. I got the
impression from the LyX manuals and user comments that LyX was pretty good
at interpreting and rendering
user-defined commands. Have I misunderstood something, or am I doing
something wrong, or is there
something wrong with my LyX installation? (I realize there are several
other threads with similar
questions, but none of them have a clear answer to this as far as I can
tell.)
I am using LyX 1.6.7 on windows xp sp3.
RSB
To help you search through the Math manual: the nomenclature that LyX
uses for this is math macro. The caveat is that you define math macros
in the body of the document, not in the preamble. All things in the
preamble are not parsed by LyX at all but simply passed on to the latex
process.
Thanks for the response Julien. I am starting to use math macros. But a
limitation of them is that I have to create them in LyX; they aren't
automatically generated when I import LaTeX files I have written by hand
(which I have a lot of!), and the result is a bunch of ugly formulas. One of
the main reasons I'm trying LyX is that it was claimed to be more compatible
with raw LaTeX than Scientific Word, which I have used for years.
Regarding the use of the preamble, section 15.2 Self-Defined Functions of
the math manual says that you can use the \DeclareMathOperator in the preamble
to define your own named functions such that the result is the same ... as
with a predefined function, which I took to mean it would look onscreen like
a predefined function. But then there is the footnote which says self-defined
functions are displayed in red, predefined ones in black. If that means all
LyX does is show the command name as ERT, then in my opinion that is a
somewhat weak (and somewhat misleading) feature.
Ryan
RE: user-defined functions (yet again)
Thanks for the response Julien. I am starting to use math macros. But a
limitation of them is that I have to create them in LyX; they aren't
automatically generated when I import LaTeX files I have written by hand
(which I have a lot of!), and the result is a bunch of ugly formulas. One
of the main reasons I'm trying LyX is that it was claimed to be more
compatible with raw LaTeX than Scientific Word, which I have used for years.
I believe LyX will import your \newcommands and convert them to math
macros if the \newcommands appear after \begin{document}
Regarding the use of the preamble, section 15.2 Self-Defined Functions of
the math manual says that you can use the \DeclareMathOperator in the
preamble to define your own named functions such that the result is the
same ... as with a predefined function, which I took to mean it would look
onscreen like a predefined function. But then there is the footnote which
says self-defined functions are displayed in red, predefined ones in
black. If that means all LyX does is show the command name as ERT, then in
my opinion that is a somewhat weak (and somewhat misleading) feature.
That's a good point. I would recommend to send a message to the LyX
documentation team.
As a general note: LyX is free software and isn't backed up by any
company. Considering this, sometimes I find that what was accomplished
with LyX is quite amazing. However sometimes I find it is lacking a lot.
The great thing, though, is that it can be made better with such great
feedback like you already started to provide. And better yet you could
provide a patch which would properly import \newcommands from the
preamble of your .tex file into a .lyx doc.
First I was only a LyX user and then I started contributing to the
project when I saw that something was lacking. I would advise you the
same if you can, it will make LyX better and you can use it to import
your .tex files properly.
Cheers,
Julien
Thanks. I confirmed that \newcommand does work if it's within the document
environment, but not in the preamble (which seems odd to me, since the preamble
seems to be a pretty reasonable place to define commands). Also, it only works
if you import it, not if you enter it in manually from within LyX (again, not
something I expected, but perhaps understandable). Since LyX can handle
\newcommand, it shouldn't be hard to get \DeclareMathOperator to display nicely
also.
I am indeed impressed with what LyX can do, which is why I believe it can be
even better. I would love to contribute -- I actually had started planning out
something very similar to LyX about a decade ago -- but unfortunately I don't
have much spare time now. Maybe someday!
Ryan
Re: user-defined functions (yet again)
Ryan Bennink wrote: One of the main reasons I'm trying LyX is that it was claimed to be more compatible with raw LaTeX than Scientific Word, which I have used for years. can you share the source where from comes this claim? compatibilty with pure latex is one of the weakest point of lyx i would say and if you need to exchange pure .tex files regularly with other authors think twice before using lyx... pavel
user-defined functions (yet again)
I am fairly new to LyX. I have been disappointed to find that simple commands
defined via \newcommand and \DeclareMathOperator in the preamble (for example,
\newcommand{\sinc}{sinc}) appear as "evil red text" onscreen. In fact, they
look exactly the same as undefined (illegal!) commands. I got the impression
from the LyX manuals and user comments that LyX was pretty good at interpreting
and rendering user-defined commands. Have I misunderstood something, or am I
doing something wrong, or is there something wrong with my LyX installation?
(I realize there are several other threads with similar questions, but none of
them have a clear answer to this as far as I can tell.)
I am using LyX 1.6.7 on windows xp sp3.
RSB
Re: user-defined functions (yet again)
On 26/01/2011 2:33 PM, Bennink, Ryan S. wrote:
I am fairly new to LyX. I have been disappointed to find that simple commands defined
via \newcommand and \DeclareMathOperator in the preamble (for example,
\newcommand{\sinc}{sinc}) appear as "evil red text" onscreen. In fact, they
look exactly the same as undefined (illegal!) commands. I got the impression from the
LyX manuals and user comments that LyX was pretty good at interpreting and rendering
user-defined commands. Have I misunderstood something, or am I doing something wrong, or
is there something wrong with my LyX installation? (I realize there are several other
threads with similar questions, but none of them have a clear answer to this as far as I
can tell.)
I am using LyX 1.6.7 on windows xp sp3.
RSB
To help you search through the Math manual: the nomenclature that LyX
uses for this is "math macro". The caveat is that you define math macros
in the body of the document, not in the preamble. All things in the
preamble are not parsed by LyX at all but simply passed on to the latex
process.
--
Julien
Re: user-defined functions (yet again)
Hi Ryan,
(list c.c.ed)
On 26/01/2011 4:33 PM, Bennink, Ryan S. wrote:
Thanks for the response Julien. I am starting to use math macros. But a
limitation of them is that I have to create them in LyX; they aren't
automatically generated when I import LaTeX files I have written by hand (which
I have a lot of!), and the result is a bunch of ugly formulas. One of the main
reasons I'm trying LyX is that it was claimed to be more compatible with raw
LaTeX than Scientific Word, which I have used for years.
I believe LyX will import your \newcommands and convert them to math
macros if the \newcommands appear after \begin{document}
Regarding the use of the preamble, section 15.2 "Self-Defined Functions" of the math manual says
that you can use the \DeclareMathOperator in the preamble to define your own named functions such that
"the result is the same ... as with a predefined function", which I took to mean it would look
onscreen like a predefined function. But then there is the footnote which says "self-defined functions
are displayed in red, predefined ones in black". If that means all LyX does is show the command name as
ERT, then in my opinion that is a somewhat weak (and somewhat misleading) feature.
That's a good point. I would recommend to send a message to the LyX
documentation team.
As a general note: LyX is free software and isn't backed up by any
company. Considering this, sometimes I find that what was accomplished
with LyX is quite amazing. However sometimes I find it is lacking a lot.
The great thing, though, is that it can be made better with such great
feedback like you already started to provide. And better yet you could
provide a patch which would properly import \newcommands from the
preamble of your .tex file into a .lyx doc.
First I was only a LyX user and then I started contributing to the
project when I saw that something was lacking. I would advise you the
same if you can, it will make LyX better and you can use it to import
your .tex files properly.
Cheers,
Julien
Re: user-defined functions (yet again)
>
> On 26/01/2011 2:33 PM, Bennink, Ryan S. wrote:
> > I am fairly new to LyX. I have been disappointed to find that simple
commands defined via \newcommand and
> \DeclareMathOperator in the preamble (for example, \newcommand{\sinc}{sinc})
appear as "evil red
> text" onscreen. In fact, they look exactly the same as undefined (illegal!)
commands. I got the
> impression from the LyX manuals and user comments that LyX was pretty good
at interpreting and rendering
> user-defined commands. Have I misunderstood something, or am I doing
something wrong, or is there
> something wrong with my LyX installation? (I realize there are several
other threads with similar
> questions, but none of them have a clear answer to this as far as I can
tell.)
> >
> > I am using LyX 1.6.7 on windows xp sp3.
> >
> > RSB
> >
>
> To help you search through the Math manual: the nomenclature that LyX
> uses for this is "math macro". The caveat is that you define math macros
> in the body of the document, not in the preamble. All things in the
> preamble are not parsed by LyX at all but simply passed on to the latex
> process.
>
Thanks for the response Julien. I am starting to use math macros. But a
limitation of them is that I have to create them in LyX; they aren't
automatically generated when I import LaTeX files I have written by hand
(which I have a lot of!), and the result is a bunch of ugly formulas. One of
the main reasons I'm trying LyX is that it was claimed to be more compatible
with raw LaTeX than Scientific Word, which I have used for years.
Regarding the use of the preamble, section 15.2 "Self-Defined Functions" of
the math manual says that you can use the \DeclareMathOperator in the preamble
to define your own named functions such that "the result is the same ... as
with a predefined function", which I took to mean it would look onscreen like
a predefined function. But then there is the footnote which says "self-defined
functions are displayed in red, predefined ones in black". If that means all
LyX does is show the command name as ERT, then in my opinion that is a
somewhat weak (and somewhat misleading) feature.
Ryan
RE: user-defined functions (yet again)
>> Thanks for the response Julien. I am starting to use math macros. But a
>> limitation of them is that I have to create them in LyX; they aren't
>> automatically generated when I import LaTeX files I have written by hand
>> (which I have a lot of!), and the result is a bunch of ugly formulas. One
>> of the main reasons I'm trying LyX is that it was claimed to be more
>> compatible with raw LaTeX than Scientific Word, which I have used for years.
>>
>
>I believe LyX will import your \newcommands and convert them to math
macros if the \newcommands appear after \begin{document}
>
>> Regarding the use of the preamble, section 15.2 "Self-Defined Functions" of
>> the math manual says that you can use the \DeclareMathOperator in the
>> preamble to define your own named functions such that "the result is the
>> same ... as with a predefined function", which I took to mean it would look
>> onscreen like a predefined function. But then there is the footnote which
>> says "self-defined functions are displayed in red, predefined ones in
>> black". If that means all LyX does is show the command name as ERT, then in
>> my opinion that is a somewhat weak (and somewhat misleading) feature.
>
>That's a good point. I would recommend to send a message to the LyX
documentation team.
>
>As a general note: LyX is free software and isn't backed up by any
company. Considering this, sometimes I find that what was accomplished
with LyX is quite amazing. However sometimes I find it is lacking a lot.
The great thing, though, is that it can be made better with such great
feedback like you already started to provide. And better yet you could
provide a patch which would properly import \newcommands from the
preamble of your .tex file into a .lyx doc.
>
>First I was only a LyX user and then I started contributing to the
project when I saw that something was lacking. I would advise you the
same if you can, it will make LyX better and you can use it to import
your .tex files properly.
>
>Cheers,
>Julien
Thanks. I confirmed that \newcommand does work if it's within the document
environment, but not in the preamble (which seems odd to me, since the preamble
seems to be a pretty reasonable place to define commands). Also, it only works
if you import it, not if you enter it in manually from within LyX (again, not
something I expected, but perhaps understandable). Since LyX can handle
\newcommand, it shouldn't be hard to get \DeclareMathOperator to display nicely
also.
I am indeed impressed with what LyX can do, which is why I believe it can be
even better. I would love to contribute -- I actually had started planning out
something very similar to LyX about a decade ago -- but unfortunately I don't
have much spare time now. Maybe someday!
Ryan
Re: user-defined functions (yet again)
Ryan Bennink wrote: > One of the main reasons I'm trying LyX is that it was claimed to be more > compatible with raw LaTeX than Scientific Word, which I have used for years. can you share the source where from comes this claim? compatibilty with pure latex is one of the weakest point of lyx i would say and if you need to exchange pure .tex files regularly with other authors think twice before using lyx... pavel
