On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 10:53 AM, Zdenek Wagner <[email protected]> wrote:
> 2012/10/30 Michaël Cadilhac <[email protected]>:
>> Hi there folks,
> How about the following solution? I am writing it directly to the mail
> without testing, I hope I won't make any error.
>
> \def\vec#1{\do@vec#1_\do@vec}
> \def\do@vec#1_#2\do@vec{\ifcat$#2$\mathbf{#1}\else\vec@subscript#1_#2\vec@subscript\fi}
> \def\vec@subscript#1_#2_\vec@subscript{\mathbf{#1}_{#2}}
Zdeněk,
Thanks for your input! However, I also have vectors such as \vec{x^i_j} (or
\vec{x_j^i}), and your solution does not seem to have a simple extension to
those cases. The original hack I had had the advantage that no syntactic
manipulation had to be made on the argument, avoiding for sure those
problems. If we have to do this syntactically, I'll think about it some
more.
Thanks again!
M.
--------------------------------------------------
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
