Fix symbols LaTeX output #323
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
\slash isn't LaTeX, but '/' is: http://mathb.in/17532 Typing '/' results in LiveFraction, so need \slash so it's even possible to type that character. Also, not a delimiter so move out of the 'delimiters' section, to the 'various symbols' section.
http://mathb.in/17532 Keep \{open,close}curlybrace for backcompat
Can just use \_ for \underscore instead: http://mathb.in/17532 \caret is more annoying, settling for \text{^} (this is in advancedSymbols.js anyway): http://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/77646/how-to-typset-the-symbol-caret-circumflex-hat
laughinghan
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 16, 2016
Ugh. As noted in 0afc6ab on #323, neither of these are real LaTeX commands. The real LaTeX command for an underscore character is simply `\_`: http://mathb.in/52174 That'd be great except that there's no easy way for MathQuill to parse `\_` differently from plain `_` because the way the parser works, there's just one registry entry `LatexCmds._` that parses both. There is no one real LaTeX command for a caret character. This post suggests 8 ways to show various caret-like characters in real LaTeX: http://tex.stackexchange.com/a/77647 Only 4 of those 8 ways work in MathJax, and only one of those 4 is a normal caret character: http://mathb.in/52187 Only 2 work in KaTeX v0.5.1, and neither are normal caret characters. The thing that works in MathJax is `\verb`, whose name is short for "verbatim" and is essentially the LaTeX equivalent of HTML's <pre>, which is really not worth our time fully implementing (which is why KaTeX doesn't have it). Simpler to just have no way of displaying a caret character, like KaTeX.
laughinghan
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 17, 2016
...that are just aliases for the '[' and ']' vanilla symbols. Before #262, \lbrack and \rbrack were parsed in the same totally broken way that \lparen, \lbrace etc were. \lparen is not a real LaTeX command and since it was so broken I highly doubt anyone was relying on how it was parsed, so it's okay that it was removed in #262. However, unlike \lparen but like \lbrace, \lbrack and \rbrack are real LaTeX commands [1]. So, like we did for \lbrace and \rbrace in 38c2b09 on #323, add vanilla symbols for them. [1]: http://tex.stackexchange.com/a/45984 also, http://tex.stackexchange.com/a/294104
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Was careless when writing these: #13 (comment)
Fix these, which aren't real LaTeX commands, to output the correct LaTeX for them.
Continue to put off dealing with #224