On 16 April 2015 at 01:21, Vafa Khalighi glkv...@gmail.com wrote:
I also support Khaled's changes to xetex; I only tested it few months ago
and if the issues I reported are fixed now, then it is good. And since when
LaTeX has a package/ or test files that uses \beginL \endL? All I remember
is
On 16 April 2015 at 12:35, Khaled Hosny dr.khaled.ho...@gmail.com wrote:
I’m testing a change that removes the direction node from around inline math
and instead (ab)uses the presence of \math(on|off) node to output the
necessary dvi opcode, and it seems to fix this issue as well. Lets hope
On 16 April 2015 at 11:54, Vafa Khalighi glkv...@gmail.com wrote:
I have not got TeXLive 2015 but that is just bad. Does the new xetex effect
any other of math typesetting that used to work fine with Knuth TeX?
yes see the example I posted in the second message I posted to this thread
in Knuth
I’m testing a change that removes the direction node from around inline
math and instead (ab)uses the presence of \math(on|off) node to output the
necessary dvi opcode, and it seems to fix this issue as well. Lets hope
that there is no some blackmagic^W deep
TeX hackery that plays with the this
To see a non contrived example where the change breaks existing
documents, take this example
(using a math expression from the breqn package documentation)
\documentclass[]{article}
\usepackage{breqn}
\begin{document}
aaa
\begin{dmath*}
g = 0 + 1 - 1
\end{dmath*}
I have not got TeXLive 2015 but that is just bad. Does the new xetex effect
any other of math typesetting that used to work fine with Knuth TeX? does
it break any package? with breqn the issue is not too bad since breqn is an
experimental package and not a lot of people are aware of it or use it.
On 16 April 2015 at 20:51, Khaled Hosny khaledho...@eglug.org wrote:
On Thu, Apr 16, 2015 at 12:39:47PM +0100, David Carlisle wrote:
On 16 April 2015 at 12:35, Khaled Hosny dr.khaled.ho...@gmail.com wrote:
I’m testing a change that removes the direction node from around inline
math
and
