> we have a more modern implementation in the next beta

I tested the following with various flavors:

$
 x\mathstrut_{3} x_{3} 
 x^3 x\mathstrut^3 
 x^\circ x\mathstrut^\circ 
 20\mathstrut^\circ 20^\circ
$

Flavors that I tried: 

2014.03.27 MkIV
2014.02.14 MkIV
2013.06.07 MkII (from latest beta)
pdfTeX 1.40.14 (from Debian TL 2013)

(wrapping in \(start|stop)text or ending with \bye, as appropriate).

My observations:

The MkII and pdftex subscripts look too high.  I know that's
sacreligious, since it is what Knuth must have intended, and I am
surprised that I didn't notice it before.

The 2014.02.14 MkIV subscript with the strut looks too low, although the
x^3 with the strut looks reasonable, or is maybe just slightly too high.
The x^\circ looks fine.  The x\mathstrut^\circ is too high.  But the
20\mathstrut^\circ looks right (and looks too low without the strut).

In 2014.03.27 MkIV, the subscript- and subscript heights are unchanged
by the strut.  The subscript heights look right.  The superscript
heights all look okay, except for the 20\mathstrut^\circ, which is too
low (same height as without the strut).  In earlier versions, one could
raise the \circ using a \mathstrut, but that no longer has an effect.

The other change, and maybe I am hallucinating this one, is that the
horizontal spacing between the x and the 3 is now slightly different
with and without the strut: It is tighter with the strut.  I think it
looks better without the strut, but am not sure.

So, overall I think it has improved.  I also wonder:

1. about the right horizontal spacing (how tight it should be)

2. how to raise the \circ in 20^\circ

-Sanjoy
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the 
Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Reply via email to