On Sat, 3 Feb 2007, Taco Hoekwater wrote:
> Aditya Mahajan wrote:
>> Hi Hans and Taco,
>>
>> Do you think it makes sense to replace {\rm mod} in the definition of
>> bmod and pmod (in math-pln.tex) by \mfunction{mod}?
>
> Yes. It would even better to move the definitions to math-tex,
> where the other named operators live.
>
On Sat, 3 Feb 2007, Hans Hagen wrote:
> makes sense, rather encoding independent eh?
>
> \ifx\mfunction\undefined \def\mfunction{\mathbin{\rm#1}} \fi
Why the mathbin? In math-ini.tex \mfunction is defined as
\def\mfunction#1{{\mr#1}}.
> \def\bmod
> {\nonscript
> \mskip-\medmuskip
> \mkern5mu
> \mfunction{mod}%
> \penalty900
> \mkern5mu
> \nonscript
> \mskip-\medmuskip}
>
> \def\pmod#1%
> {\allowbreak
> \mkern18mu
> (\mfunction{mod}\,\,#1)}
How about replacing \, with \mskup\thinskip? That will be the macro
more readable.
> i changed it
Thanks.
> (wondering what it does in pln)
Probably because it is defined by plain.tex
Aditya
_______________________________________________
dev-context mailing list
dev-context@ntg.nl
http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/dev-context
