Re: [tex4ht] Bizarre bug - \def\sp{...}

2016-11-04 Thread William F Hammond
Karl Berry writes: > It could still easily have ill effects if other (tex4ht or > latex) macros that use \sp happen to get invoked, > though. Safer not to redefine it. -k Safer still to use a suitable LaTeX profile. With such a system introducing \sp as a newcommand in

Re: [tex4ht] Bizarre bug - \def\sp{...}

2016-11-02 Thread Karl Berry
[timing issue] It could still easily have ill effects if other (tex4ht or latex) macros that use \sp happen to get invoked, though. Safer not to redefine it. -k

Re: [tex4ht] Bizarre bug - \def\sp{...}

2016-11-01 Thread Karl Berry
Sorry for the off-topic quation: Does anyone know why? \sp (and \sb) were defined in plain TeX, to provide control sequences to achieve the results of ^ and _ without having to type special characters. LaTeX inherited them, as it inherited a variety of other "random" plain TeX control

Re: [tex4ht] Bizarre bug - \def\sp{...}

2016-11-01 Thread Michal Hoftich
Quoting Hans Georg Schaathun (2016-11-01 20:19:52) > On Tue, Nov 01, 2016 at 08:53:22AM -0700, William F Hammond wrote: > > Unfortunately, latex.ltx (in the latex base) contains: \let\sp=^ > > Ah. I did not know. Thanks. > Sorry for the off-topic quation: Does anyone know why? > What is it

Re: [tex4ht] Bizarre bug - \def\sp{...}

2016-11-01 Thread William F Hammond
On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 6:10 AM, Hans Georg Schaathun < georg+...@schaathun.net> wrote: > I tried to define an \sp macro in LaTeX, to do something like this: >\def\sp{\mathsf{span}} >\[ \sp\{x\} \] >\[ x^2 \] > There is no problem with pdflatex, but evidently tex4ht uses \sp for >