pg.sty

[Alex-Jordan]

This introduces a latex sty file for PG macros. For getting started, it has one macro, \answerRule{} which takes a numerical argument and makes a rule so many ex wide. I sunk it 3pt lower from what answer rules have always been in PGbasicmacros.pl.

This pairs with openwebwork/webwork2#2081.

To test, get on both branches. Have a problem with answer rules, preferably that includes an answer rule array. First visit the problem editor. Test that you can build the PDF (and see if the sunken underline is in effect.) Then test that you can download the tex and build it locally.

Then put the problem in a set. See if you can generate the PDF hardcopy. And see if you download the tex bundle if you can build the set.

[pstaabp]

This all works well. As mentioned earlier, I would recommend having the default be an empty box instead of a line. If we do that, we should switch the essay_box over to a box as well.

[Alex-Jordan]

I don't think an outlined box is good for print when you consider someone trying to hand write something like a rational expression.

…

On Sat, Jun 24, 2023, 4:46 AM Peter Staab ***@***.***> wrote: This all works well. As mentioned earlier, I would recommend having the default be an empty box instead of a line. If we do that, we should switch the essay_box over to a box as well. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <https://protect2.fireeye.com/v1/url?k=31323334-501cfaeb-3132feb7-454455535732-40f7eb386e930084&q=1&e=5a963b62-b982-46cb-9d00-a7a0979d85ae&u=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fopenwebwork%2Fpg%2Fpull%2F863%23issuecomment-1605423224>, or unsubscribe <https://protect2.fireeye.com/v1/url?k=31323334-501cfaeb-3132feb7-454455535732-1728803f83926a38&q=1&e=5a963b62-b982-46cb-9d00-a7a0979d85ae&u=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fnotifications%2Funsubscribe-auth%2FABEDOABPBWJ5YKOA4U7KVD3XM3HPTANCNFSM6AAAAAAZRFQZIA> . You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[drdrew42]

Is there any way to label these answer rules without affecting the output? I'm thinking of ways to post-process the output (once the answers are processed) to insert the correct answers... in HTML the inputs are labeled with an ID, can we do something similar here?

[Alex-Jordan]

If it's within the scope of a single problem then you could tag it with the answer name. Like \answerRule[AnSwEr0001]{10} or something. And the macro could give you whatever marker you need in the .tex for that.

…

On Sat, Jun 24, 2023, 12:15 PM K. Andrew Parker ***@***.***> wrote: Is there any way to label these answer rules without affecting the output? I'm thinking of ways to post-process the output (once the answers are processed) to insert the correct answers... in HTML the inputs are labeled with an ID, can we do something similar here? — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <https://protect2.fireeye.com/v1/url?k=31323334-501d2dca-3132feb7-454455534531-63807a681cfe0944&q=1&e=7ee528aa-368a-449d-98b5-c2d54ce776d2&u=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fopenwebwork%2Fpg%2Fpull%2F863%23issuecomment-1605692985>, or unsubscribe <https://protect2.fireeye.com/v1/url?k=31323334-501d2dca-3132feb7-454455534531-2fb3e051fe56679a&q=1&e=7ee528aa-368a-449d-98b5-c2d54ce776d2&u=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fnotifications%2Funsubscribe-auth%2FABEDOAGALXVMXXLHAEE5M5TXM44FXANCNFSM6AAAAAAZRFQZIA> . You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[Alex-Jordan]

I changed it so that the .tex file has like \answerRule[AnSwEr0001]{10}. This is a start to what I think @drdrew42 commented on.

[drgrice1]

This looks good. Just a question on the \ProvidesFile usage.

[drgrice1]

By the way, here is more information on the ProvidesPackage and ProvidesFile commands.

[pstaabp]

After doing some more testing, I included a problem with a PGchoicemacros.pl and it seems to be if the match_questions_list is used for this, then I get an error when generating the hardcopy. Here's an example:
Library/Indiana/Indiana_setSeries5IntegralTest/ur_sr_5_11.pg. (This problem has some error, but runs on the current PG-2.18 branch).

Here's one of the tex errors:

! Argument of \\answerRule has an extra }.
<inserted text> 
                \par 
l.40 \item[\answerRule[AnSwEr0002]
                                  {5}2.] \(\displaystyle \sum_{n=1}^\infty \...
I've run across a `}' that doesn't seem to match anything.
For example, `\def\a#1{...}' and `\a}' would produce
this error. If you simply proceed now, the `\par' that
I've just inserted will cause me to report a runaway
argument that might be the root of the problem. But if
your `}' was spurious, just type `2' and it will go away.

[drgrice1]

The problem with this and the match_questions_list and match_questions_list_varbox (which that problem actually uses) is that those methods put the answer rule inside the option brackets for a enumerate item. So you get \item[\answerRule[AnSwEr0001]{5}1.] with this pull request. LaTeX always has problems with nested option brackets. To fix this you could wrap the answer rule in braces so that this would become \item[{\answerRule[AnSwEr0001]{5}}1.]. That works, and shouldn't cause any issues elsewhere.

[Alex-Jordan]

I made that change and pushed, but I still get a compilation error. I'm looking into it.

[Alex-Jordan]

Eh, I just didn't have the corresponding webwork2 branch going. Working for me now.

[pstaabp]

Looks good now. @drgrice1 do you want to look at this anymore or else we can merge.

[drgrice1]

This is good.