Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
Andre Poenitz wrote: On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 02:52:40PM +0200, Olivier Ripoll wrote: Okay, maybe not export, but view as pdf (pdflatex) gives the correct behaviour. And when I save and reopen, it's gone. So it must be the read-in then. What does the .lyx look like? Andre' I have set a small html page with screenshots to illustrate the problem. Also there is a lyx file at the bottom: http://olivier.ripoll.free.fr/lyx/lyx_limits.html Regards, Olivier.
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 09:51:14AM +0200, Olivier Ripoll wrote: Andre Poenitz wrote: On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 02:52:40PM +0200, Olivier Ripoll wrote: Okay, maybe not export, but view as pdf (pdflatex) gives the correct behaviour. And when I save and reopen, it's gone. So it must be the read-in then. What does the .lyx look like? Andre' I have set a small html page with screenshots to illustrate the problem. Ahh... Although you mentioned \iiint and \oint I silently interpreted 'integral' as \int. My fault. That behaviour you are seeing is because \iiint and \oint are unknown to LyX (red text in the formula), so LyX does not know that they take limits either. And as limits stick to the subscript (which is wrong as the should stick to the symbol) the \limit gets eaten on reading in. As a work around I'll add \iiint and \oint to the list of known symbols but I'll have to think about sticking the limit information to the right place... Andre' -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 09:51:14AM +0200, Olivier Ripoll wrote: I have set a small html page with screenshots to illustrate the problem. Also there is a lyx file at the bottom: http://olivier.ripoll.free.fr/lyx/lyx_limits.html Aehm... I just noticed that you defined your own \oiint in the preamble. I am afraid there is no way to make this known to lyx. Things were a bit differently if you used some well known package. To everybody: I found a \oiint in some pxfonts.sty in my local LaTeX tree. Is this widely used/sufficiently common that proper LyX support for these things would count as nice feature? Andre' -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
Am Montag, 8. Juli 2002 17:14 schrieb Andre Poenitz: On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 03:52:05PM +0200, Ralf Goertz wrote: The '\limit' iformation as implemented 'sticks' to the super/subscript. So if that is deleted, the limit is lost as well. But I don't delete anything. I toggle the style of the limit using M-m l, but that does not affect the LaTeX file. I never see the limit below the lim in the dvi-file, regardless of what I see in LyX. It still works for me. *shrug* You need (a) a \lim, (b) a super r subscript following this and (c) the cursor in between. Okay, I tried the cvs-version and the bug is gone. Thanks for your help. Ralf
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
To everybody: I found a \oiint in some pxfonts.sty in my local LaTeX tree. Is this widely used/sufficiently common that proper LyX support for these things would count as nice feature? From what I've seen on comp.text.tex, the txfont and pxfont packages are strongly deprecated. There are supposedly problems with them, which the author isn't going to fix. So for at least those two packages, it probably isn't worth supporting. OTOH, I have used txfonts, and didn't notice any problems, but who am I to say. Rod _ rod | Beneath the waves, the waves / That's where I will be / | I'm going to see the cow beneath the sea. | They Might Be Giants, Lincoln
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
Andre Poenitz wrote: On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 09:51:14AM +0200, Olivier Ripoll wrote: I have set a small html page with screenshots to illustrate the problem. Also there is a lyx file at the bottom: http://olivier.ripoll.free.fr/lyx/lyx_limits.html Aehm... I just noticed that you defined your own \oiint in the preamble. I am afraid there is no way to make this known to lyx. Things were a bit differently if you used some well known package. To everybody: I found a \oiint in some pxfonts.sty in my local LaTeX tree. Is this widely used/sufficiently common that proper LyX support for these things would count as nice feature? here is one with zero font :-) http://groups.google.com/groups?q=%5Coiint+group:comp.text.texhl=enlr=ie=UTF-8selm=yfilmnl283a.fsf%40triumf.carnum=1 Herbert -- http://www.lyx.org/help/
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
Andre Poenitz wrote: On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 09:51:14AM +0200, Olivier Ripoll wrote: I have set a small html page with screenshots to illustrate the problem. Also there is a lyx file at the bottom: http://olivier.ripoll.free.fr/lyx/lyx_limits.html Aehm... I just noticed that you defined your own \oiint in the preamble. Well, I found this definition somewhere on the net. I am afraid there is no way to make this known to lyx. Things were a bit differently if you used some well known package. But the problem is also present for the \iiint and this is from a well known package, isn't it? To everybody: I found a \oiint in some pxfonts.sty in my local LaTeX tree. Is this widely used/sufficiently common that proper LyX support for these things would count as nice feature? http://www.lyx.org/help/symbols/wasysym.php has a oiint also Andre' Also, I have a bug that's really bothering me (I can live with this limits bug, and also with the crash with E). It seems the mini buffer does not answer when I click in it. How can I delete an etiquette (sorry, I don't know the original word for it, my LyX is localised French) of an equation? The usuer manual says You can turn off numbering of a specific line by entering math-nonumber in the minibuffer but how can I access it? ( http://www.lyx.org/~jug/lyx/lyxdoc/UserGuide/node34.html ) regards, Olivier.
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
Olivier Ripoll wrote: http://www.lyx.org/help/symbols/wasysym.php has a oiint also Here is a better one ftp://ftp.dante.de/tex-archive/macros/latex/contrib/supported/esint/esint.readme Herbert -- http://www.lyx.org/help/
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 10:57:52AM +0200, Herbert Voss wrote: http://groups.google.com/groups?q=%5Coiint+group:comp.text.texhl=enlr=ie=UTF-8selm=yfilmnl283a.fsf%40triumf.carnum=1 That's a bit above the level of LaTeX LyX understands Andre' -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 11:04:29AM +0200, Olivier Ripoll wrote: But the problem is also present for the \iiint and this is from a well known package, isn't it? Yes, but here the problem is that it is not a symbol (as in one char from some font) but a macro that uses several symbols. To everybody: I found a \oiint in some pxfonts.sty in my local LaTeX tree. Is this widely used/sufficiently common that proper LyX support for these things would count as nice feature? http://www.lyx.org/help/symbols/wasysym.php has a oiint also Ah... so we support wasysym by providing help? Why don't we do Right it as we do with the AMS Fonts then? Herbert? Also, I have a bug that's really bothering me (I can live with this limits bug, and also with the crash with E). It seems the mini buffer does not answer when I click in it. What happens if you type M-x? This is the short cut to access the minibuffer. How can I delete an etiquette (sorry, I don't know the original word for it, my LyX is localised French) of an equation? The usuer manual says You can turn off numbering of a specific line by entering math-nonumber in the minibuffer but how can I access it? ( http://www.lyx.org/~jug/lyx/lyxdoc/UserGuide/node34.html ) M-x math-nonumber But M-m n should be possible as well. Andre' -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
Andre Poenitz wrote: Also, I have a bug that's really bothering me (I can live with this limits bug, and also with the crash with E). It seems the mini buffer does not answer when I click in it. What happens if you type M-x? This is the short cut to access the minibuffer. I'll try this tonight How can I delete an etiquette (sorry, I don't know the original word for it, my LyX is localised French) of an equation? The usuer manual says You can turn off numbering of a specific line by entering math-nonumber in the minibuffer but how can I access it? ( http://www.lyx.org/~jug/lyx/lyxdoc/UserGuide/node34.html ) M-x math-nonumber But M-m n should be possible as well. I knew there was something simpler! I don't remember where I had red it, but I knew there was. Thanks, I'll try this one preferably (laziness) Andre' -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson) So Jefferson was advocating for the GPL long before it was created... nice quotation Sincerely, Olivier.
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
Andre Poenitz wrote: http://www.lyx.org/help/symbols/wasysym.php has a oiint also Ah... so we support wasysym by providing help? no, as I said wasysym is not the best solution. the ints are more upright than italic. esint is a very new package and I do not look into the code, to see how the oiint is build. Why don't we do Right it as we do with the AMS Fonts then? something like this?? http://groups.google.com/groups?q=oiint+group:comp.text.texhl=enlr=ie=UTF-8selm=30SEP199723123880%40reg.triumf.carnum=6 Herbert -- http://www.lyx.org/help/
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 12:10:49PM +0200, Herbert Voss wrote: Why don't we do Right it as we do with the AMS Fonts then? something like this?? http://groups.google.com/groups?q=oiint+group:comp.text.texhl=enlr=ie=UTF-8selm=30SEP199723123880%40reg.triumf.carnum=6 I though it'd be nice to support the symbols from wasy (but not really the \oiint stuff)... Andre' -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 12:43:03PM +0200, Herbert Voss wrote: I though it'd be nice to support the symbols from wasy (but not really the \oiint stuff)... wasy is ok, but it uses a lot of memory for its symbols. When run thruogh LaTeX or the font itself? I'd go just for the screen support Andre' -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
Andre Poenitz wrote: On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 12:43:03PM +0200, Herbert Voss wrote: I though it'd be nice to support the symbols from wasy (but not really the \oiint stuff)... wasy is ok, but it uses a lot of memory for its symbols. When run thruogh LaTeX or the font itself? the font. but maybe that I'm wrong for newer versions, because I read this in comp.text.tex Herbert -- http://www.lyx.org/help/
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
Andre Poenitz wrote: On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 02:52:40PM +0200, Olivier Ripoll wrote: Okay, maybe not export, but view as pdf (pdflatex) gives the correct behaviour. And when I save and reopen, it's gone. So it must be the read-in then. What does the .lyx look like? Andre' I have set a small html page with screenshots to illustrate the problem. Also there is a lyx file at the bottom: http://olivier.ripoll.free.fr/lyx/lyx_limits.html Regards, Olivier.
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 09:51:14AM +0200, Olivier Ripoll wrote: Andre Poenitz wrote: On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 02:52:40PM +0200, Olivier Ripoll wrote: Okay, maybe not export, but view as pdf (pdflatex) gives the correct behaviour. And when I save and reopen, it's gone. So it must be the read-in then. What does the .lyx look like? Andre' I have set a small html page with screenshots to illustrate the problem. Ahh... Although you mentioned \iiint and \oint I silently interpreted 'integral' as \int. My fault. That behaviour you are seeing is because \iiint and \oint are unknown to LyX (red text in the formula), so LyX does not know that they take limits either. And as limits stick to the subscript (which is wrong as the should stick to the symbol) the \limit gets eaten on reading in. As a work around I'll add \iiint and \oint to the list of known symbols but I'll have to think about sticking the limit information to the right place... Andre' -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 09:51:14AM +0200, Olivier Ripoll wrote: I have set a small html page with screenshots to illustrate the problem. Also there is a lyx file at the bottom: http://olivier.ripoll.free.fr/lyx/lyx_limits.html Aehm... I just noticed that you defined your own \oiint in the preamble. I am afraid there is no way to make this known to lyx. Things were a bit differently if you used some well known package. To everybody: I found a \oiint in some pxfonts.sty in my local LaTeX tree. Is this widely used/sufficiently common that proper LyX support for these things would count as nice feature? Andre' -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
Am Montag, 8. Juli 2002 17:14 schrieb Andre Poenitz: On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 03:52:05PM +0200, Ralf Goertz wrote: The '\limit' iformation as implemented 'sticks' to the super/subscript. So if that is deleted, the limit is lost as well. But I don't delete anything. I toggle the style of the limit using M-m l, but that does not affect the LaTeX file. I never see the limit below the lim in the dvi-file, regardless of what I see in LyX. It still works for me. *shrug* You need (a) a \lim, (b) a super r subscript following this and (c) the cursor in between. Okay, I tried the cvs-version and the bug is gone. Thanks for your help. Ralf
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
To everybody: I found a \oiint in some pxfonts.sty in my local LaTeX tree. Is this widely used/sufficiently common that proper LyX support for these things would count as nice feature? From what I've seen on comp.text.tex, the txfont and pxfont packages are strongly deprecated. There are supposedly problems with them, which the author isn't going to fix. So for at least those two packages, it probably isn't worth supporting. OTOH, I have used txfonts, and didn't notice any problems, but who am I to say. Rod _ rod | Beneath the waves, the waves / That's where I will be / | I'm going to see the cow beneath the sea. | They Might Be Giants, Lincoln
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
Andre Poenitz wrote: On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 09:51:14AM +0200, Olivier Ripoll wrote: I have set a small html page with screenshots to illustrate the problem. Also there is a lyx file at the bottom: http://olivier.ripoll.free.fr/lyx/lyx_limits.html Aehm... I just noticed that you defined your own \oiint in the preamble. I am afraid there is no way to make this known to lyx. Things were a bit differently if you used some well known package. To everybody: I found a \oiint in some pxfonts.sty in my local LaTeX tree. Is this widely used/sufficiently common that proper LyX support for these things would count as nice feature? here is one with zero font :-) http://groups.google.com/groups?q=%5Coiint+group:comp.text.texhl=enlr=ie=UTF-8selm=yfilmnl283a.fsf%40triumf.carnum=1 Herbert -- http://www.lyx.org/help/
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
Andre Poenitz wrote: On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 09:51:14AM +0200, Olivier Ripoll wrote: I have set a small html page with screenshots to illustrate the problem. Also there is a lyx file at the bottom: http://olivier.ripoll.free.fr/lyx/lyx_limits.html Aehm... I just noticed that you defined your own \oiint in the preamble. Well, I found this definition somewhere on the net. I am afraid there is no way to make this known to lyx. Things were a bit differently if you used some well known package. But the problem is also present for the \iiint and this is from a well known package, isn't it? To everybody: I found a \oiint in some pxfonts.sty in my local LaTeX tree. Is this widely used/sufficiently common that proper LyX support for these things would count as nice feature? http://www.lyx.org/help/symbols/wasysym.php has a oiint also Andre' Also, I have a bug that's really bothering me (I can live with this limits bug, and also with the crash with E). It seems the mini buffer does not answer when I click in it. How can I delete an etiquette (sorry, I don't know the original word for it, my LyX is localised French) of an equation? The usuer manual says You can turn off numbering of a specific line by entering math-nonumber in the minibuffer but how can I access it? ( http://www.lyx.org/~jug/lyx/lyxdoc/UserGuide/node34.html ) regards, Olivier.
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
Olivier Ripoll wrote: http://www.lyx.org/help/symbols/wasysym.php has a oiint also Here is a better one ftp://ftp.dante.de/tex-archive/macros/latex/contrib/supported/esint/esint.readme Herbert -- http://www.lyx.org/help/
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 10:57:52AM +0200, Herbert Voss wrote: http://groups.google.com/groups?q=%5Coiint+group:comp.text.texhl=enlr=ie=UTF-8selm=yfilmnl283a.fsf%40triumf.carnum=1 That's a bit above the level of LaTeX LyX understands Andre' -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 11:04:29AM +0200, Olivier Ripoll wrote: But the problem is also present for the \iiint and this is from a well known package, isn't it? Yes, but here the problem is that it is not a symbol (as in one char from some font) but a macro that uses several symbols. To everybody: I found a \oiint in some pxfonts.sty in my local LaTeX tree. Is this widely used/sufficiently common that proper LyX support for these things would count as nice feature? http://www.lyx.org/help/symbols/wasysym.php has a oiint also Ah... so we support wasysym by providing help? Why don't we do Right it as we do with the AMS Fonts then? Herbert? Also, I have a bug that's really bothering me (I can live with this limits bug, and also with the crash with E). It seems the mini buffer does not answer when I click in it. What happens if you type M-x? This is the short cut to access the minibuffer. How can I delete an etiquette (sorry, I don't know the original word for it, my LyX is localised French) of an equation? The usuer manual says You can turn off numbering of a specific line by entering math-nonumber in the minibuffer but how can I access it? ( http://www.lyx.org/~jug/lyx/lyxdoc/UserGuide/node34.html ) M-x math-nonumber But M-m n should be possible as well. Andre' -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
Andre Poenitz wrote: Also, I have a bug that's really bothering me (I can live with this limits bug, and also with the crash with E). It seems the mini buffer does not answer when I click in it. What happens if you type M-x? This is the short cut to access the minibuffer. I'll try this tonight How can I delete an etiquette (sorry, I don't know the original word for it, my LyX is localised French) of an equation? The usuer manual says You can turn off numbering of a specific line by entering math-nonumber in the minibuffer but how can I access it? ( http://www.lyx.org/~jug/lyx/lyxdoc/UserGuide/node34.html ) M-x math-nonumber But M-m n should be possible as well. I knew there was something simpler! I don't remember where I had red it, but I knew there was. Thanks, I'll try this one preferably (laziness) Andre' -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson) So Jefferson was advocating for the GPL long before it was created... nice quotation Sincerely, Olivier.
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
Andre Poenitz wrote: http://www.lyx.org/help/symbols/wasysym.php has a oiint also Ah... so we support wasysym by providing help? no, as I said wasysym is not the best solution. the ints are more upright than italic. esint is a very new package and I do not look into the code, to see how the oiint is build. Why don't we do Right it as we do with the AMS Fonts then? something like this?? http://groups.google.com/groups?q=oiint+group:comp.text.texhl=enlr=ie=UTF-8selm=30SEP199723123880%40reg.triumf.carnum=6 Herbert -- http://www.lyx.org/help/
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 12:10:49PM +0200, Herbert Voss wrote: Why don't we do Right it as we do with the AMS Fonts then? something like this?? http://groups.google.com/groups?q=oiint+group:comp.text.texhl=enlr=ie=UTF-8selm=30SEP199723123880%40reg.triumf.carnum=6 I though it'd be nice to support the symbols from wasy (but not really the \oiint stuff)... Andre' -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 12:43:03PM +0200, Herbert Voss wrote: I though it'd be nice to support the symbols from wasy (but not really the \oiint stuff)... wasy is ok, but it uses a lot of memory for its symbols. When run thruogh LaTeX or the font itself? I'd go just for the screen support Andre' -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
Andre Poenitz wrote: On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 12:43:03PM +0200, Herbert Voss wrote: I though it'd be nice to support the symbols from wasy (but not really the \oiint stuff)... wasy is ok, but it uses a lot of memory for its symbols. When run thruogh LaTeX or the font itself? the font. but maybe that I'm wrong for newer versions, because I read this in comp.text.tex Herbert -- http://www.lyx.org/help/
Re: "\limits" bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
Andre Poenitz wrote: > On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 02:52:40PM +0200, Olivier Ripoll wrote: > > Okay, maybe not export, but "view as pdf (pdflatex)" gives the correct > > behaviour. And when I save and reopen, it's gone. > > So it must be the read-in then. What does the .lyx look like? > > Andre' > I have set a small html page with screenshots to illustrate the problem. Also there is a lyx file at the bottom: http://olivier.ripoll.free.fr/lyx/lyx_limits.html Regards, Olivier.
Re: "\limits" bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 09:51:14AM +0200, Olivier Ripoll wrote: > Andre Poenitz wrote: > > > On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 02:52:40PM +0200, Olivier Ripoll wrote: > > > Okay, maybe not export, but "view as pdf (pdflatex)" gives the correct > > > behaviour. And when I save and reopen, it's gone. > > > > So it must be the read-in then. What does the .lyx look like? > > > > Andre' > > > > I have set a small html page with screenshots to illustrate the problem. Ahh... Although you mentioned \iiint and \oint I silently interpreted 'integral' as \int. My fault. That behaviour you are seeing is because \iiint and \oint are unknown to LyX (red text in the formula), so LyX does not know that they take limits either. And as limits stick to the subscript (which is wrong as the should stick to the symbol) the \limit gets eaten on reading in. As a work around I'll add \iiint and \oint to the list of known symbols but I'll have to think about sticking the limit information to the right place... Andre' -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)
Re: "\limits" bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 09:51:14AM +0200, Olivier Ripoll wrote: > I have set a small html page with screenshots to illustrate the problem. > Also there is a lyx file at the bottom: > http://olivier.ripoll.free.fr/lyx/lyx_limits.html Aehm... I just noticed that you defined your own \oiint in the preamble. I am afraid there is no way to make this "known" to lyx. Things were a bit differently if you used some "well known" package. To everybody: I found a \oiint in some pxfonts.sty in my local LaTeX tree. Is this widely used/sufficiently common that proper LyX support for these things would count as "nice feature"? Andre' -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)
Re: "\limits" bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
Am Montag, 8. Juli 2002 17:14 schrieb Andre Poenitz: > On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 03:52:05PM +0200, Ralf Goertz wrote: > > > The '\limit' iformation as implemented 'sticks' to the super/subscript. > > > So if that is deleted, the limit is lost as well. > > > > But I don't delete anything. I toggle the style of the limit using M-m l, > > but that does not affect the LaTeX file. I never see the limit below the > > lim in the dvi-file, regardless of what I see in LyX. > > It still works for me. *shrug* > > You need (a) a \lim, (b) a super r subscript following this and (c) the > cursor in between. Okay, I tried the cvs-version and the bug is gone. Thanks for your help. Ralf
Re: "\limits" bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
> To everybody: I found a \oiint in some pxfonts.sty in my local LaTeX tree. > Is this widely used/sufficiently common that proper LyX support for these > things would count as "nice feature"? >From what I've seen on comp.text.tex, the txfont and pxfont packages are strongly deprecated. There are supposedly problems with them, which the author isn't going to fix. So for at least those two packages, it probably isn't worth supporting. OTOH, I have used txfonts, and didn't notice any problems, but who am I to say. Rod _ rod | "Beneath the waves, the waves / That's where I will be / | I'm going to see the cow beneath the sea." | They Might Be Giants, Lincoln
Re: "\limits" bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
Andre Poenitz wrote: > On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 09:51:14AM +0200, Olivier Ripoll wrote: > >>I have set a small html page with screenshots to illustrate the problem. >>Also there is a lyx file at the bottom: >>http://olivier.ripoll.free.fr/lyx/lyx_limits.html >> > > Aehm... I just noticed that you defined your own \oiint in the preamble. > > I am afraid there is no way to make this "known" to lyx. > Things were a bit differently if you used some "well known" package. > > To everybody: I found a \oiint in some pxfonts.sty in my local LaTeX tree. > Is this widely used/sufficiently common that proper LyX support for these > things would count as "nice feature"? here is one with zero font :-) http://groups.google.com/groups?q=%5Coiint+group:comp.text.tex=en==UTF-8=yfilmnl283a.fsf%40triumf.ca=1 Herbert -- http://www.lyx.org/help/
Re: "\limits" bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
Andre Poenitz wrote: > On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 09:51:14AM +0200, Olivier Ripoll wrote: > > I have set a small html page with screenshots to illustrate the problem. > > Also there is a lyx file at the bottom: > > http://olivier.ripoll.free.fr/lyx/lyx_limits.html > > Aehm... I just noticed that you defined your own \oiint in the preamble. Well, I found this definition somewhere on the net. > I am afraid there is no way to make this "known" to lyx. > Things were a bit differently if you used some "well known" package. But the problem is also present for the \iiint and this is from a "well known" package, isn't it? > To everybody: I found a \oiint in some pxfonts.sty in my local LaTeX tree. > Is this widely used/sufficiently common that proper LyX support for these > things would count as "nice feature"? http://www.lyx.org/help/symbols/wasysym.php has a oiint also > Andre' Also, I have a bug that's really bothering me (I can live with this "limits" bug, and also with the "crash with E"). It seems the mini buffer does not answer when I click in it. How can I delete an "etiquette" (sorry, I don't know the original word for it, my LyX is localised French) of an equation? The usuer manual says "You can turn off numbering of a specific line by entering math-nonumber in the minibuffer " but how can I access it? ( http://www.lyx.org/~jug/lyx/lyxdoc/UserGuide/node34.html ) regards, Olivier.
Re: "\limits" bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
Olivier Ripoll wrote: > > http://www.lyx.org/help/symbols/wasysym.php has a oiint also Here is a better one ftp://ftp.dante.de/tex-archive/macros/latex/contrib/supported/esint/esint.readme Herbert -- http://www.lyx.org/help/
Re: "\limits" bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 10:57:52AM +0200, Herbert Voss wrote: > >http://groups.google.com/groups?q=%5Coiint+group:comp.text.tex=en==UTF-8=yfilmnl283a.fsf%40triumf.ca=1 That's a bit above the level of LaTeX LyX understands Andre' -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)
Re: "\limits" bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 11:04:29AM +0200, Olivier Ripoll wrote: > But the problem is also present for the \iiint and this is from a "well known" > package, isn't it? Yes, but here the problem is that it is not a symbol (as in "one char from some font") but a macro that uses several symbols. > > To everybody: I found a \oiint in some pxfonts.sty in my local LaTeX tree. > > Is this widely used/sufficiently common that proper LyX support for these > > things would count as "nice feature"? > > http://www.lyx.org/help/symbols/wasysym.php has a oiint also Ah... so we "support" wasysym by providing help? Why don't we do "Right" it as we do with the AMS Fonts then? Herbert? > Also, I have a bug that's really bothering me (I can live with this > "limits" bug, and also with the "crash with E"). It seems the mini > buffer does not answer when I click in it. What happens if you type M-x? This is the short cut to access the minibuffer. > How can I delete an > "etiquette" (sorry, I don't know the original word for it, my LyX is > localised French) of an equation? The usuer manual says "You can turn off > numbering of a specific line by entering math-nonumber in the minibuffer > " but how can I access it? ( > http://www.lyx.org/~jug/lyx/lyxdoc/UserGuide/node34.html ) M-x math-nonumber But M-m n should be possible as well. Andre' -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)
Re: "\limits" bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
Andre Poenitz wrote: > > > Also, I have a bug that's really bothering me (I can live with this > > "limits" bug, and also with the "crash with E"). It seems the mini > > buffer does not answer when I click in it. > > What happens if you type M-x? This is the short cut to access the > minibuffer. I'll try this tonight > > How can I delete an > > "etiquette" (sorry, I don't know the original word for it, my LyX is > > localised French) of an equation? The usuer manual says "You can turn off > > numbering of a specific line by entering math-nonumber in the minibuffer > > " but how can I access it? ( > > http://www.lyx.org/~jug/lyx/lyxdoc/UserGuide/node34.html ) > > M-x math-nonumber > > But > > M-m n should be possible as well. I knew there was something simpler! I don't remember where I had red it, but I knew there was. Thanks, I'll try this one preferably (laziness) > > Andre' > > -- > Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, > will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson) So Jefferson was advocating for the GPL long before it was created... nice quotation Sincerely, Olivier.
Re: "\limits" bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
Andre Poenitz wrote: >>http://www.lyx.org/help/symbols/wasysym.php has a oiint also >> > > Ah... so we "support" wasysym by providing help? no, as I said wasysym is not the best solution. the ints are more upright than italic. esint is a very new package and I do not look into the code, to see how the oiint is build. > > Why don't we do "Right" it as we do with the AMS Fonts then? something like this?? http://groups.google.com/groups?q=oiint+group:comp.text.tex=en==UTF-8=30SEP199723123880%40reg.triumf.ca=6 Herbert -- http://www.lyx.org/help/
Re: "\limits" bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 12:10:49PM +0200, Herbert Voss wrote: > >Why don't we do "Right" it as we do with the AMS Fonts then? > > > something like this?? > > >http://groups.google.com/groups?q=oiint+group:comp.text.tex=en==UTF-8=30SEP199723123880%40reg.triumf.ca=6 I though it'd be nice to support the symbols from wasy (but not really the \oiint stuff)... Andre' -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)
Re: "\limits" bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 12:43:03PM +0200, Herbert Voss wrote: > >I though it'd be nice to support the symbols from wasy (but not really > >the \oiint stuff)... > > wasy is ok, but it uses a lot of memory for its symbols. When run thruogh LaTeX or the font itself? I'd go just for the screen support Andre' -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)
Re: "\limits" bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
Andre Poenitz wrote: > On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 12:43:03PM +0200, Herbert Voss wrote: > >>>I though it'd be nice to support the symbols from wasy (but not really >>>the \oiint stuff)... >>> >>wasy is ok, but it uses a lot of memory for its symbols. >> > > When run thruogh LaTeX or the font itself? the font. but maybe that I'm wrong for newer versions, because I read this in comp.text.tex Herbert -- http://www.lyx.org/help/
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 12:22:16PM +0200, Ralf wrote: is it true that the \lim\limits problem is still there in 1.2.0? What '\lim\limits problem'? What is the problem? (I guess it must be a problem with my installation). By the way, can't we have a switch that tells lyx to place the limits above and below the symbol in inline formulas (like intlimits in amsmath for displayed formulas)? This does not sound impossible, but 'up-down-stuff' is still nasty... What exactly does '\intlimis' do? Andre' -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 12:22:16PM +0200, Ralf wrote:
is it true that the \lim\limits problem is still there in 1.2.0?
What '\lim\limits problem'?
The \limits command is not saved. When you write something like
\lim\limits _{x\rightarrow\infinity}
in inline formulas the subscript will be under the \lim. When you save the
file an reopen it, the \limits is gone, so that the subscript will be
displayed like usual subscripts (e.g. like in $x_{i}$). This applies only to
inline formulas.
What is the problem? (I guess it must be a problem with my installation).
By the way, can't we have a switch that tells lyx to place the limits
above and below the symbol in inline formulas (like intlimits in
amsmath for displayed formulas)?
This does not sound impossible, but 'up-down-stuff' is still nasty...
What exactly does '\intlimis' do?
When you use \intlimits as an option for amsmath, integral limits in displayed
formulas are put below and above the integral sign as a default, so you don't
have to use \limits at all. I regard this as a matter of style. If one uses
\limits in inline formulas once, it would be strange not to use it always.
That's why I suggest having the option to do so as a default would be very
nice.
Ralf
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 01:16:17PM +0200, Ralf wrote:
The \limits command is not saved. When you write something like
\lim\limits _{x\rightarrow\infinity}
in inline formulas the subscript will be under the \lim. When you save the
file an reopen it, the \limits is gone, so that the subscript will be
displayed like usual subscripts (e.g. like in $x_{i}$). This applies only to
inline formulas.
I'll have a look. There is certainly something fishy there
When you use \intlimits as an option for amsmath, integral limits in
displayed formulas are put below and above the integral sign as a
default, so you don't have to use \limits at all. I regard this as a
matter of style. If one uses \limits in inline formulas once, it would be
strange not to use it always. That's why I suggest having the option
to do so as a default would be very nice.
We are currently not supporting specific options to the ams packages. How
would a user interface for this look like?
Andre'
--
Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security,
will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
Ralf wrote:
On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 12:22:16PM +0200, Ralf wrote:
is it true that the \lim\limits problem is still there in 1.2.0?
What '\lim\limits problem'?
The \limits command is not saved. When you write something like
\lim\limits _{x\rightarrow\infinity}
in inline formulas the subscript will be under the \lim. When you save the
file an reopen it, the \limits is gone, so that the subscript will be
displayed like usual subscripts (e.g. like in $x_{i}$). This applies only to
inline formulas.
this applies to non inline formulas for me here, with some integrals (\iiint
maybe) I can type the coomands, export or view correctly, but cannot save it
Olivier
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 02:21:43PM +0200, Ralf wrote: I'll have a look. There is certainly something fishy there I could live with that. I had to before (defining something like \Lim=\lim\limits), but as I said in version 1.2.0 I can't even change the position of the limits not even in displayed formulas! That's a big problem. M-m l cycles between the three options '\limits', '\nolimits' and '', so maybe you just have to press M-m l twice to see some effect. It seems to work in 1.3.0cvs and I think there have been no change in this area since 1.2.0 As for this there is no need to do anything. It is enough to put intlimits or sumlimit into the extra document options and use amsmath. And it works. As far as I know there is no amsmath option that does the same for inline formulas. That's why I thought it could be provided by LyX, in a similar way like the float options. They are also used for the whole document. so why not have a check box that, if checked, would lead to the insertion of \limits after every inlined \lim command (or \int or \sum) The float options interface is not exactly nice and I don't think it is a good idea to have more of it... Andre' PS: Posts containing a full name have a better chance to get through my spam prevention machinery (as in look at the sender/subject line and only if this triggers positive feelings do not press 'd'). I understand that the netiquette do not require a full name outside the de.* but I thought I should mention this nevertheless...) -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 02:31:56PM +0200, Olivier Ripoll wrote: this applies to non inline formulas for me here, with some integrals (\iiint maybe) I can type the coomands, export or view correctly, but cannot save it export and save use exactly the same code. I would be surprised if they had different behaviour. Andre' -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
Andre Poenitz wrote: On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 02:31:56PM +0200, Olivier Ripoll wrote: this applies to non inline formulas for me here, with some integrals (\iiint maybe) I can type the coomands, export or view correctly, but cannot save it export and save use exactly the same code. I would be surprised if they had different behaviour. Andre' Okay, maybe not export, but view as pdf (pdflatex) gives the correct behaviour. And when I save and reopen, it's gone. It was the same with 1.1.6fix4, I had reported it here. BTW, I have a nice and reliable crash with Enlightenment window manager, is it known? from a terminal, I have: [olive@localhost olive]$ lyx BadDrawable (invalid Pixmap or Window parameter) id: 690 Abandon [olive@localhost olive]$ I have this when I use the remember settings of E to remember a size for LyX window that is different from the basic one. Could some other user of E confirm before I write a Bug report? Regards, Olivier.
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
M-m l cycles between the three options '\limits', '\nolimits' and '', so maybe you just have to press M-m l twice to see some effect. It seems to work in 1.3.0cvs and I think there have been no change in this area since 1.2.0 Nothing happens. I will now try 1.3.0cvs. I will give a progress report then. The float options interface is not exactly nice and I don't think it is a good idea to have more of it... Floats was not a good example. Seperation is a better one. You can choose between Indent and Skip. We could have Inlined formulas with limits and nolimits. As with Seperation, one can still change an individual formula in the usual way. What about loosing the \limits in inlined \lim after reopening? Can you confirm that? PS: Posts containing a full name have a better chance to get through my spam prevention machinery (as in look at the sender/subject line and only if this triggers positive feelings do not press 'd'). I understand that the netiquette do not require a full name outside the de.* but I thought I should mention this nevertheless...) Okay, Ralf
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 02:52:40PM +0200, Olivier Ripoll wrote: Okay, maybe not export, but view as pdf (pdflatex) gives the correct behaviour. And when I save and reopen, it's gone. So it must be the read-in then. What does the .lyx look like? Andre' -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 03:01:31PM +0200, Ralf Goertz wrote: M-m l cycles between the three options '\limits', '\nolimits' and '', so maybe you just have to press M-m l twice to see some effect. It seems to work in 1.3.0cvs and I think there have been no change in this area since 1.2.0 Nothing happens. The cursor must be directly behind the \lim (not behind the subscript). Maybe this has changed from 1.1.6. What about loosing the \limits in inlined \lim after reopening? Can you confirm that? I seems to work for me (all tree cases and inlined/displayed) Andre' -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
Andre Poenitz wrote:
On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 02:52:40PM +0200, Olivier Ripoll wrote:
Okay, maybe not export, but view as pdf (pdflatex) gives the correct
behaviour. And when I save and reopen, it's gone.
So it must be the read-in then. What does the .lyx look like?
Andre'
I'll have a look at it tonight (my thesis is at home). By backup here says :
Using the Green theorem
\begin_inset Formula \begin{equation}
\iiint _{V}\left(G\nabla ^{2}U-U\nabla ^{2}G\right)dv=\oiint
_{S}\left(G\frac{\partial U}{\partial n}-U\frac{\partial G}{\partial
n}\right)ds\label{eq:Green theorem}\end{equation}
But I'm not sure this was saved after writing with \limits or with a freshly
rewritten equation.
V and S would be nice under the iiint and oiint.
Sincerely,
Olivier.
PS: And I forgot to say it: Thanks for LyX. I use it to write my PhD thesis
(one more) :)
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 03:01:31PM +0200, Ralf Goertz wrote: The cursor must be directly behind the \lim (not behind the subscript). Maybe this has changed from 1.1.6. Okay, now it works for integrals and sums but not for limits (in 1.1.6 you had to put the cursor in front of \lim, \sum \int). Although I can now toggle the limits for \lim on screen, there is no \limits in the LaTeX file. Ralf
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 03:35:11PM +0200, Ralf Goertz wrote: Okay, now it works for integrals and sums but not for limits (in 1.1.6 you had to put the cursor in front of \lim, \sum \int). Although I can now toggle the limits for \lim on screen, there is no \limits in the LaTeX file. The '\limit' iformation as implemented 'sticks' to the super/subscript. So if that is deleted, the limit is lost as well. Andre' -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
Am Montag, 8. Juli 2002 15:43 schrieb Andre Poenitz: On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 03:35:11PM +0200, Ralf Goertz wrote: Okay, now it works for integrals and sums but not for limits (in 1.1.6 you had to put the cursor in front of \lim, \sum \int). Although I can now toggle the limits for \lim on screen, there is no \limits in the LaTeX file. The '\limit' iformation as implemented 'sticks' to the super/subscript. So if that is deleted, the limit is lost as well. But I don't delete anything. I toggle the style of the limit using M-m l, but that does not affect the LaTeX file. I never see the limit below the lim in the dvi-file, regardless of what I see in LyX. Ralf
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 03:52:05PM +0200, Ralf Goertz wrote: The '\limit' iformation as implemented 'sticks' to the super/subscript. So if that is deleted, the limit is lost as well. But I don't delete anything. I toggle the style of the limit using M-m l, but that does not affect the LaTeX file. I never see the limit below the lim in the dvi-file, regardless of what I see in LyX. It still works for me. *shrug* You need (a) a \lim, (b) a super r subscript following this and (c) the cursor in between. Andre' -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 12:22:16PM +0200, Ralf wrote: is it true that the \lim\limits problem is still there in 1.2.0? What '\lim\limits problem'? What is the problem? (I guess it must be a problem with my installation). By the way, can't we have a switch that tells lyx to place the limits above and below the symbol in inline formulas (like intlimits in amsmath for displayed formulas)? This does not sound impossible, but 'up-down-stuff' is still nasty... What exactly does '\intlimis' do? Andre' -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 12:22:16PM +0200, Ralf wrote:
is it true that the \lim\limits problem is still there in 1.2.0?
What '\lim\limits problem'?
The \limits command is not saved. When you write something like
\lim\limits _{x\rightarrow\infinity}
in inline formulas the subscript will be under the \lim. When you save the
file an reopen it, the \limits is gone, so that the subscript will be
displayed like usual subscripts (e.g. like in $x_{i}$). This applies only to
inline formulas.
What is the problem? (I guess it must be a problem with my installation).
By the way, can't we have a switch that tells lyx to place the limits
above and below the symbol in inline formulas (like intlimits in
amsmath for displayed formulas)?
This does not sound impossible, but 'up-down-stuff' is still nasty...
What exactly does '\intlimis' do?
When you use \intlimits as an option for amsmath, integral limits in displayed
formulas are put below and above the integral sign as a default, so you don't
have to use \limits at all. I regard this as a matter of style. If one uses
\limits in inline formulas once, it would be strange not to use it always.
That's why I suggest having the option to do so as a default would be very
nice.
Ralf
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 01:16:17PM +0200, Ralf wrote:
The \limits command is not saved. When you write something like
\lim\limits _{x\rightarrow\infinity}
in inline formulas the subscript will be under the \lim. When you save the
file an reopen it, the \limits is gone, so that the subscript will be
displayed like usual subscripts (e.g. like in $x_{i}$). This applies only to
inline formulas.
I'll have a look. There is certainly something fishy there
When you use \intlimits as an option for amsmath, integral limits in
displayed formulas are put below and above the integral sign as a
default, so you don't have to use \limits at all. I regard this as a
matter of style. If one uses \limits in inline formulas once, it would be
strange not to use it always. That's why I suggest having the option
to do so as a default would be very nice.
We are currently not supporting specific options to the ams packages. How
would a user interface for this look like?
Andre'
--
Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security,
will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
Ralf wrote:
On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 12:22:16PM +0200, Ralf wrote:
is it true that the \lim\limits problem is still there in 1.2.0?
What '\lim\limits problem'?
The \limits command is not saved. When you write something like
\lim\limits _{x\rightarrow\infinity}
in inline formulas the subscript will be under the \lim. When you save the
file an reopen it, the \limits is gone, so that the subscript will be
displayed like usual subscripts (e.g. like in $x_{i}$). This applies only to
inline formulas.
this applies to non inline formulas for me here, with some integrals (\iiint
maybe) I can type the coomands, export or view correctly, but cannot save it
Olivier
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 02:21:43PM +0200, Ralf wrote: I'll have a look. There is certainly something fishy there I could live with that. I had to before (defining something like \Lim=\lim\limits), but as I said in version 1.2.0 I can't even change the position of the limits not even in displayed formulas! That's a big problem. M-m l cycles between the three options '\limits', '\nolimits' and '', so maybe you just have to press M-m l twice to see some effect. It seems to work in 1.3.0cvs and I think there have been no change in this area since 1.2.0 As for this there is no need to do anything. It is enough to put intlimits or sumlimit into the extra document options and use amsmath. And it works. As far as I know there is no amsmath option that does the same for inline formulas. That's why I thought it could be provided by LyX, in a similar way like the float options. They are also used for the whole document. so why not have a check box that, if checked, would lead to the insertion of \limits after every inlined \lim command (or \int or \sum) The float options interface is not exactly nice and I don't think it is a good idea to have more of it... Andre' PS: Posts containing a full name have a better chance to get through my spam prevention machinery (as in look at the sender/subject line and only if this triggers positive feelings do not press 'd'). I understand that the netiquette do not require a full name outside the de.* but I thought I should mention this nevertheless...) -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 02:31:56PM +0200, Olivier Ripoll wrote: this applies to non inline formulas for me here, with some integrals (\iiint maybe) I can type the coomands, export or view correctly, but cannot save it export and save use exactly the same code. I would be surprised if they had different behaviour. Andre' -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
Andre Poenitz wrote: On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 02:31:56PM +0200, Olivier Ripoll wrote: this applies to non inline formulas for me here, with some integrals (\iiint maybe) I can type the coomands, export or view correctly, but cannot save it export and save use exactly the same code. I would be surprised if they had different behaviour. Andre' Okay, maybe not export, but view as pdf (pdflatex) gives the correct behaviour. And when I save and reopen, it's gone. It was the same with 1.1.6fix4, I had reported it here. BTW, I have a nice and reliable crash with Enlightenment window manager, is it known? from a terminal, I have: [olive@localhost olive]$ lyx BadDrawable (invalid Pixmap or Window parameter) id: 690 Abandon [olive@localhost olive]$ I have this when I use the remember settings of E to remember a size for LyX window that is different from the basic one. Could some other user of E confirm before I write a Bug report? Regards, Olivier.
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
M-m l cycles between the three options '\limits', '\nolimits' and '', so maybe you just have to press M-m l twice to see some effect. It seems to work in 1.3.0cvs and I think there have been no change in this area since 1.2.0 Nothing happens. I will now try 1.3.0cvs. I will give a progress report then. The float options interface is not exactly nice and I don't think it is a good idea to have more of it... Floats was not a good example. Seperation is a better one. You can choose between Indent and Skip. We could have Inlined formulas with limits and nolimits. As with Seperation, one can still change an individual formula in the usual way. What about loosing the \limits in inlined \lim after reopening? Can you confirm that? PS: Posts containing a full name have a better chance to get through my spam prevention machinery (as in look at the sender/subject line and only if this triggers positive feelings do not press 'd'). I understand that the netiquette do not require a full name outside the de.* but I thought I should mention this nevertheless...) Okay, Ralf
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 02:52:40PM +0200, Olivier Ripoll wrote: Okay, maybe not export, but view as pdf (pdflatex) gives the correct behaviour. And when I save and reopen, it's gone. So it must be the read-in then. What does the .lyx look like? Andre' -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 03:01:31PM +0200, Ralf Goertz wrote: M-m l cycles between the three options '\limits', '\nolimits' and '', so maybe you just have to press M-m l twice to see some effect. It seems to work in 1.3.0cvs and I think there have been no change in this area since 1.2.0 Nothing happens. The cursor must be directly behind the \lim (not behind the subscript). Maybe this has changed from 1.1.6. What about loosing the \limits in inlined \lim after reopening? Can you confirm that? I seems to work for me (all tree cases and inlined/displayed) Andre' -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
Andre Poenitz wrote:
On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 02:52:40PM +0200, Olivier Ripoll wrote:
Okay, maybe not export, but view as pdf (pdflatex) gives the correct
behaviour. And when I save and reopen, it's gone.
So it must be the read-in then. What does the .lyx look like?
Andre'
I'll have a look at it tonight (my thesis is at home). By backup here says :
Using the Green theorem
\begin_inset Formula \begin{equation}
\iiint _{V}\left(G\nabla ^{2}U-U\nabla ^{2}G\right)dv=\oiint
_{S}\left(G\frac{\partial U}{\partial n}-U\frac{\partial G}{\partial
n}\right)ds\label{eq:Green theorem}\end{equation}
But I'm not sure this was saved after writing with \limits or with a freshly
rewritten equation.
V and S would be nice under the iiint and oiint.
Sincerely,
Olivier.
PS: And I forgot to say it: Thanks for LyX. I use it to write my PhD thesis
(one more) :)
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 03:01:31PM +0200, Ralf Goertz wrote: The cursor must be directly behind the \lim (not behind the subscript). Maybe this has changed from 1.1.6. Okay, now it works for integrals and sums but not for limits (in 1.1.6 you had to put the cursor in front of \lim, \sum \int). Although I can now toggle the limits for \lim on screen, there is no \limits in the LaTeX file. Ralf
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 03:35:11PM +0200, Ralf Goertz wrote: Okay, now it works for integrals and sums but not for limits (in 1.1.6 you had to put the cursor in front of \lim, \sum \int). Although I can now toggle the limits for \lim on screen, there is no \limits in the LaTeX file. The '\limit' iformation as implemented 'sticks' to the super/subscript. So if that is deleted, the limit is lost as well. Andre' -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
Am Montag, 8. Juli 2002 15:43 schrieb Andre Poenitz: On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 03:35:11PM +0200, Ralf Goertz wrote: Okay, now it works for integrals and sums but not for limits (in 1.1.6 you had to put the cursor in front of \lim, \sum \int). Although I can now toggle the limits for \lim on screen, there is no \limits in the LaTeX file. The '\limit' iformation as implemented 'sticks' to the super/subscript. So if that is deleted, the limit is lost as well. But I don't delete anything. I toggle the style of the limit using M-m l, but that does not affect the LaTeX file. I never see the limit below the lim in the dvi-file, regardless of what I see in LyX. Ralf
Re: \limits bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 03:52:05PM +0200, Ralf Goertz wrote: The '\limit' iformation as implemented 'sticks' to the super/subscript. So if that is deleted, the limit is lost as well. But I don't delete anything. I toggle the style of the limit using M-m l, but that does not affect the LaTeX file. I never see the limit below the lim in the dvi-file, regardless of what I see in LyX. It still works for me. *shrug* You need (a) a \lim, (b) a super r subscript following this and (c) the cursor in between. Andre' -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)
Re: "\limits" bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 12:22:16PM +0200, Ralf wrote: > is it true that the \lim\limits problem is still there in 1.2.0? What '\lim\limits problem'? > What is the problem? (I guess it must be a problem with my installation). > By the way, can't we have a switch that tells lyx to place the limits > above and below the symbol in inline formulas (like intlimits in > amsmath for displayed formulas)? This does not sound impossible, but 'up-down-stuff' is still nasty... What exactly does '\intlimis' do? Andre' -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)
Re: "\limits" bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
> On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 12:22:16PM +0200, Ralf wrote:
> > is it true that the \lim\limits problem is still there in 1.2.0?
>
> What '\lim\limits problem'?
>
The \limits command is not saved. When you write something like
\lim\limits _{x\rightarrow\infinity}
in inline formulas the subscript will be under the \lim. When you save the
file an reopen it, the \limits is gone, so that the subscript will be
displayed like usual subscripts (e.g. like in $x_{i}$). This applies only to
inline formulas.
> > What is the problem? (I guess it must be a problem with my installation).
> > By the way, can't we have a switch that tells lyx to place the limits
> > above and below the symbol in inline formulas (like intlimits in
> > amsmath for displayed formulas)?
>
> This does not sound impossible, but 'up-down-stuff' is still nasty...
> What exactly does '\intlimis' do?
When you use \intlimits as an option for amsmath, integral limits in displayed
formulas are put below and above the integral sign as a default, so you don't
have to use \limits at all. I regard this as a matter of style. If one uses
\limits in inline formulas once, it would be strange not to use it always.
That's why I suggest having the option to do so as a default would be very
nice.
Ralf
Re: "\limits" bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 01:16:17PM +0200, Ralf wrote:
> The \limits command is not saved. When you write something like
>
> \lim\limits _{x\rightarrow\infinity}
>
> in inline formulas the subscript will be under the \lim. When you save the
> file an reopen it, the \limits is gone, so that the subscript will be
> displayed like usual subscripts (e.g. like in $x_{i}$). This applies only to
> inline formulas.
I'll have a look. There is certainly something fishy there
> When you use \intlimits as an option for amsmath, integral limits in
> displayed formulas are put below and above the integral sign as a
> default, so you don't have to use \limits at all. I regard this as a
> matter of style. If one uses \limits in inline formulas once, it would be
> strange not to use it always. That's why I suggest having the option
> to do so as a default would be very nice.
We are currently not supporting specific options to the ams packages. How
would a user interface for this look like?
Andre'
--
Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security,
will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)
Re: "\limits" bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
Ralf wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 12:22:16PM +0200, Ralf wrote:
> > > is it true that the \lim\limits problem is still there in 1.2.0?
> >
> > What '\lim\limits problem'?
> >
>
> The \limits command is not saved. When you write something like
>
> \lim\limits _{x\rightarrow\infinity}
>
> in inline formulas the subscript will be under the \lim. When you save the
> file an reopen it, the \limits is gone, so that the subscript will be
> displayed like usual subscripts (e.g. like in $x_{i}$). This applies only to
> inline formulas.
this applies to non inline formulas for me here, with some integrals (\iiint
maybe) I can type the coomands, export or view correctly, but cannot save it
Olivier
Re: "\limits" bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 02:21:43PM +0200, Ralf wrote: > > I'll have a look. There is certainly something fishy there > > I could live with that. I had to before (defining something like > \Lim=\lim\limits), but as I said in version 1.2.0 I can't even change the > position of the limits not even in displayed formulas! That's a big problem. M-m l cycles between the three options '\limits', '\nolimits' and '', so maybe you just have to press M-m l twice to see some effect. It seems to work in 1.3.0cvs and I think there have been no change in this area since 1.2.0 > As for this there is no need to do anything. It is enough to put "intlimits" > or "sumlimit" into the extra document options and use amsmath. And it works. > As far as I know there is no amsmath option that does the same for inline > formulas. That's why I thought it could be provided by LyX, in a similar way > like the float options. They are also used for the whole document. so why not > have a check box that, if checked, would lead to the insertion of \limits > after every inlined \lim command (or \int or \sum) The float options interface is not exactly nice and I don't think it is a good idea to have more of it... Andre' PS: Posts containing a full name have a better chance to get through my spam prevention machinery (as in "look at the sender/subject line and only if this triggers positive feelings do not press 'd'"). I understand that the netiquette do not require a full name outside the de.* but I thought I should mention this nevertheless...) -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)
Re: "\limits" bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 02:31:56PM +0200, Olivier Ripoll wrote: > this applies to non inline formulas for me here, with some integrals (\iiint > maybe) I can type the coomands, export or view correctly, but cannot save it export and save use exactly the same code. I would be surprised if they had different behaviour. Andre' -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)
Re: "\limits" bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
Andre Poenitz wrote: > On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 02:31:56PM +0200, Olivier Ripoll wrote: > > this applies to non inline formulas for me here, with some integrals (\iiint > > maybe) I can type the coomands, export or view correctly, but cannot save it > > export and save use exactly the same code. > > I would be surprised if they had different behaviour. > > Andre' Okay, maybe not export, but "view as pdf (pdflatex)" gives the correct behaviour. And when I save and reopen, it's gone. It was the same with 1.1.6fix4, I had reported it here. BTW, I have a nice and reliable crash with Enlightenment window manager, is it known? from a terminal, I have: [olive@localhost olive]$ lyx BadDrawable (invalid Pixmap or Window parameter) id: 690 Abandon [olive@localhost olive]$ I have this when I use the "remember" settings of E to remember a size for LyX window that is different from the basic one. Could some other user of E confirm before I write a Bug report? Regards, Olivier.
Re: "\limits" bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
> > M-m l cycles between the three options '\limits', '\nolimits' and '', so > maybe you just have to press M-m l twice to see some effect. It seems to > work in 1.3.0cvs and I think there have been no change in this area since > 1.2.0 Nothing happens. I will now try 1.3.0cvs. I will give a progress report then. > The float options interface is not exactly nice and I don't think it is a > good idea to have more of it... > "Floats" was not a good example. "Seperation" is a better one. You can choose between "Indent" and "Skip". We could have "Inlined formulas" with "limits" and "nolimits". As with Seperation, one can still change an individual formula in the usual way. What about loosing the \limits in inlined \lim after reopening? Can you confirm that? > > PS: Posts containing a full name have a better chance to get through my > spam prevention machinery (as in "look at the sender/subject line and only > if this triggers positive feelings do not press 'd'"). I understand that > the netiquette do not require a full name outside the de.* but I thought > I should mention this nevertheless...) Okay, Ralf
Re: "\limits" bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 02:52:40PM +0200, Olivier Ripoll wrote: > Okay, maybe not export, but "view as pdf (pdflatex)" gives the correct > behaviour. And when I save and reopen, it's gone. So it must be the read-in then. What does the .lyx look like? Andre' -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)
Re: "\limits" bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 03:01:31PM +0200, Ralf Goertz wrote: > > M-m l cycles between the three options '\limits', '\nolimits' and '', so > > maybe you just have to press M-m l twice to see some effect. It seems to > > work in 1.3.0cvs and I think there have been no change in this area since > > 1.2.0 > > Nothing happens. The cursor must be directly behind the \lim (not behind the subscript). Maybe this has changed from 1.1.6. > What about loosing the \limits in inlined \lim after reopening? Can you > confirm that? I seems to work for me (all tree cases and inlined/displayed) Andre' -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)
Re: "\limits" bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
Andre Poenitz wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 02:52:40PM +0200, Olivier Ripoll wrote:
> > Okay, maybe not export, but "view as pdf (pdflatex)" gives the correct
> > behaviour. And when I save and reopen, it's gone.
>
> So it must be the read-in then. What does the .lyx look like?
>
> Andre'
>
I'll have a look at it tonight (my thesis is at home). By backup here says :
Using the Green theorem
\begin_inset Formula \begin{equation}
\iiint _{V}\left(G\nabla ^{2}U-U\nabla ^{2}G\right)dv=\oiint
_{S}\left(G\frac{\partial U}{\partial n}-U\frac{\partial G}{\partial
n}\right)ds\label{eq:Green theorem}\end{equation}
But I'm not sure this was saved after writing with \limits or with a freshly
rewritten equation.
V and S would be nice under the iiint and oiint.
Sincerely,
Olivier.
PS: And I forgot to say it: Thanks for LyX. I use it to write my PhD thesis
(one more) :)
Re: "\limits" bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
> On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 03:01:31PM +0200, Ralf Goertz wrote: > > The cursor must be directly behind the \lim (not behind the subscript). > Maybe this has changed from 1.1.6. Okay, now it works for integrals and sums but not for limits (in 1.1.6 you had to put the cursor in front of \lim, \sum \int). Although I can now toggle the limits for \lim on screen, there is no \limits in the LaTeX file. Ralf
Re: "\limits" bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 03:35:11PM +0200, Ralf Goertz wrote: > Okay, now it works for integrals and sums but not for limits (in 1.1.6 > you had to put the cursor in front of \lim, \sum \int). Although I can > now toggle the limits for \lim on screen, there is no \limits in the > LaTeX file. The '\limit' iformation as implemented 'sticks' to the super/subscript. So if that is deleted, the limit is lost as well. Andre' -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)
Re: "\limits" bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
Am Montag, 8. Juli 2002 15:43 schrieb Andre Poenitz: > On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 03:35:11PM +0200, Ralf Goertz wrote: > > Okay, now it works for integrals and sums but not for limits (in 1.1.6 > > you had to put the cursor in front of \lim, \sum \int). Although I can > > now toggle the limits for \lim on screen, there is no \limits in the > > LaTeX file. > > The '\limit' iformation as implemented 'sticks' to the super/subscript. So > if that is deleted, the limit is lost as well. But I don't delete anything. I toggle the style of the limit using M-m l, but that does not affect the LaTeX file. I never see the limit below the lim in the dvi-file, regardless of what I see in LyX. Ralf
Re: "\limits" bug worse than before in version 1.2.0
On Mon, Jul 08, 2002 at 03:52:05PM +0200, Ralf Goertz wrote: > > The '\limit' iformation as implemented 'sticks' to the super/subscript. So > > if that is deleted, the limit is lost as well. > > But I don't delete anything. I toggle the style of the limit using M-m l, but > that does not affect the LaTeX file. I never see the limit below the lim in > the dvi-file, regardless of what I see in LyX. It still works for me. *shrug* You need (a) a \lim, (b) a super r subscript following this and (c) the cursor in between. Andre' -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)
