# menclose notation in subscripts #414

Closed
opened this issue Mar 18, 2013 · 9 comments

Projects
None yet
3 participants
Member

### pkra commented Mar 18, 2013

 Some menclose options do not work in subscripts. For example, actuarial, madruwb.  a n i [/itex] 
Member Author

### pkra commented Mar 18, 2013

 Oh, it's a zoom problem -- the "line disappearing" phenomenon.
Member Author

### pkra commented Mar 18, 2013

 Using Chrome 25 and pasting into the live test, the strikes do not show in default zoom.
Member

### dpvc commented Mar 19, 2013

 OK, it looks like the thickness of the lines are being scaled when they are scripts. That should probably not be the case, (or they should be clamped from below to prevent getting smaller than 1px). I will take out the scaling for now.

### dpvc pushed a commit to dpvc/MathJax that referenced this issue Mar 19, 2013

 Don't scale line thickness for menclose (so lines won't disapear in s… 
…cripts). Resolves issue mathjax#414.
 990e3c6 
Member

### dpvc commented Mar 19, 2013

 The issue414 branch of my fork of MathJax should resolve this issue.
Contributor

### fred-wang commented Mar 20, 2013

 I don't really like this method to comment out old code rather than just removing it, that just makes the code messy. For external developers reading the source, that looks like if the code is still experimental, with core developers still trying various options and searching what's the best one. We certainly need to keep track of the code changes but this is supposed to be done in the Git history... I would prefer a comment indicating what this "t" variable is used for. Then if you feel it important, you may also explain in this comment why the scale is not included in the computation and add a reference to issue 414. BTW, this commit might be in conflict with the one from issue 362.
Contributor

### fred-wang commented Mar 20, 2013

 => Do not write automated tests

### dpvc pushed a commit to dpvc/MathJax that referenced this issue Mar 20, 2013

 Bump version number and add comments referring to issue mathjax#414. 
 0724a8e 
Member

### dpvc commented Mar 20, 2013

 OK, I added comments and removed the commented code. I don't think this conflicts with issue 362 as the changes you made to menclose.js there are not the same lines as I change here, and I think that means they will merge properly.
Contributor

### fred-wang commented Mar 20, 2013

 OK, thanks. => Ready for release.
Member

### dpvc commented Mar 20, 2013

 OK, merged into develop.