[NTG-context] lbrack?

2010-03-22 Thread Hans van der Meer
This program: \setupbodyfont[lmodern] \starttext \type{$\lbrace$} $\lbrace$\crlf \type{$\lbrack$} $\lbrack$\crlf \stoptext This does typeset a left brace but chokes on \lbrack. I took my copy of the TeX Book and find \brack as one of the defined delimiters in chapter 17. How come? ConTeXt

Re: [NTG-context] lbrack?

2010-03-22 Thread Aditya Mahajan
On Mon, 22 Mar 2010, Hans van der Meer wrote: This program: \setupbodyfont[lmodern] \starttext \type{$\lbrace$} $\lbrace$\crlf \type{$\lbrack$} $\lbrack$\crlf \stoptext This does typeset a left brace but chokes on \lbrack. I took my copy of the TeX Book and find \brack as one of the defined

Re: [NTG-context] lbrack?

2010-03-22 Thread Wolfgang Schuster
Am 22.03.10 16:00, schrieb Aditya Mahajan: For some reason it is defined as \lbracket in MkIV and undefined in MkII. Does anyone use \lbracket? If not, we can change it to \lbrack. Otherwise, we can also have both \lbrack and \lbracket defined. Any thoughts? Either both or the long form only,

Re: [NTG-context] lbrack?

2010-03-22 Thread Hans van der Meer
On 22 mrt 2010, at 16:18, Wolfgang Schuster wrote: Am 22.03.10 16:00, schrieb Aditya Mahajan: For some reason it is defined as \lbracket in MkIV and undefined in MkII. Does anyone use \lbracket? If not, we can change it to \lbrack. Otherwise, we can also have both \lbrack and \lbracket

Re: [NTG-context] lbrack?

2010-03-22 Thread Wolfgang Schuster
Am 22.03.10 16:32, schrieb Hans van der Meer: Any thoughts? Either both or the long form only, memory is no longer a reason to create funny names like \infty (can we add \infinity please) I strongly disagree with the idea not defining the forms \lbrack and \lbrace. How do you understand both?

Re: [NTG-context] lbrack?

2010-03-22 Thread Hans van der Meer
On 22 mrt 2010, at 16:37, Wolfgang Schuster wrote: Am 22.03.10 16:32, schrieb Hans van der Meer: Any thoughts? Either both or the long form only, memory is no longer a reason to create funny names like \infty (can we add \infinity please) I strongly disagree with the idea not defining the

Re: [NTG-context] lbrack?

2010-03-22 Thread Aditya Mahajan
On Mon, 22 Mar 2010, Hans van der Meer wrote: On 22 mrt 2010, at 16:37, Wolfgang Schuster wrote: Am 22.03.10 16:32, schrieb Hans van der Meer: Any thoughts? Either both or the long form only, memory is no longer a reason to create funny names like \infty (can we add \infinity please) I

Re: [NTG-context] lbrack?

2010-03-22 Thread Hans Hagen
On 22-3-2010 16:32, Hans van der Meer wrote: On 22 mrt 2010, at 16:18, Wolfgang Schuster wrote: Am 22.03.10 16:00, schrieb Aditya Mahajan: For some reason it is defined as \lbracket in MkIV and undefined in MkII. Does anyone use \lbracket? If not, we can change it to \lbrack. Otherwise, we

Re: [NTG-context] lbrack?

2010-03-22 Thread Hans Hagen
On 22-3-2010 16:00, Aditya Mahajan wrote: On Mon, 22 Mar 2010, Hans van der Meer wrote: This program: \setupbodyfont[lmodern] \starttext \type{$\lbrace$} $\lbrace$\crlf \type{$\lbrack$} $\lbrack$\crlf \stoptext This does typeset a left brace but chokes on \lbrack. I took my copy of the TeX

Re: [NTG-context] lbrack?

2010-03-22 Thread Aditya Mahajan
On Mon, 22 Mar 2010, Hans Hagen wrote: On 22-3-2010 16:32, Hans van der Meer wrote: On 22 mrt 2010, at 16:18, Wolfgang Schuster wrote: Am 22.03.10 16:00, schrieb Aditya Mahajan: For some reason it is defined as \lbracket in MkIV and undefined in MkII. Does anyone use \lbracket? If not, we

Re: [NTG-context] lbrack?

2010-03-22 Thread Hans Hagen
On 22-3-2010 22:38, Aditya Mahajan wrote: That sounds good. Do you want the shortcuts to be defined in char-def or someplace else? let's make a list and then put the long ones in chardef and the short ones in a mkiv file -