Re: LyX 1.0.4.
On Wed, Sep 29, 1999 at 08:59:47PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > > Finally we have LyX version 1.0.4 ready. Yay! www.lyx.org should probably replace the 1.0.3 release with something like: -- LyX v1.0.4 was released on September 29, 1999 This is mostly a bug fix release over 1.0.3, along with some expansion for new layouts and languages. This release is considered to be extremely stable. The most important changes: * several bugfixes. * DocBook support * new layouts * better handling of custom pagesizes. * more document files translated to other languages. For more information, see the CHANGES file that comes with the distribution. ------ -Amir
displaymath vs. equation
Dumb question.
Do I have to type math-number in the minibuffer for every single equation in
my whole document? (Or use a perl script to change \[ to \begin{equation}?)
I can't imagine that's the case. I know a bunch of people have written their
theses in lyx already. So what's the secret to having all of your equations
numbered?
-Amir
math mode question (repost)
Dumb question.
Do I have to type math-number in the minibuffer for every single equation in
my whole document? (Or use a perl script to change \[ to \begin{equation}?)
I can't imagine that's the case. I know a bunch of people have written their
theses in lyx already. So what's the secret?o
-Amir
Re: displaymath vs. equation
On Thu, Mar 23, 2000 at 12:34:06PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> >>>>> "Amir" == Amir Karger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> If you add a number to your equations, I guess you mean a label too?
Well, I don't need every equation to have a unique \ref, but yes, I want
them to be numbered 1.1, 1.2, etc.
> In this case it will be \begin{equation}. Otherwise, if you feel like
> to cheat latex, you can try something like the following in the
> preamble:
>
> \renewcommand\[{\begin{equation}}
> \renewcommand\]{\end{equation}}
Are you telling me that every person who's written their thesis with LyX has
either used that hack or math-number'ed every single equation in their
thesis? I'll probably have only 30 or so, but some theses have hundreds!
On the other hand, I just looked at math.bind and found out I can use
"M-m n" to number an equation, so it's not so painful after all.
Nonetheless, there ought to be a command & corresponding binding that
automatically opens an equation instead of a displaymath
(e.g., "M-m e" = "M-m d" + "M-m n"). Of course I ought to do it myself. I
guess I'm just too lazy. But if Dekel is working on putting math-number in
the menu, maybe he could do this on the side?
-Amir
Re: displaymath vs. equation
On Thu, Mar 23, 2000 at 04:34:21PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > >>>>> "Amir" == Amir Karger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Why would you like to number every single equation when you will not > refer to them? Just for the pleasure to have an equation numbered > (4.5.103)? I even wrote a packages which suppresses numbering of > equations when the equation is not referred to :) >From the Revtex docs (3.1, but I doubt they've changed): "The most common (and preferred) type of displayed equation in The APS Journals in a *single-line equation, with an equation number on the same line*. Try to set as many equations as you can in this way." (emphasis theirs). They do tell you about \[, but don't seem to encourage it. I can't tell you *why* it's done that way, but AFAICT all the chem/phys/bio journal papers I've looked at number all equations. As well as the two theses I've got on my desk. > Try the new command-sequence. Something like > > \bind "M-m e" "command-sequence math-mode ; math-number ;" Ah! Neat idea! I'll see how it goes. Speaking of math-bind, the current math.bind has: \bind "M-m ~S-period" "accent-dot" But when I hit shift-period, I get a ">", and so I get \bind "M-m ~S-greater" "math-delim rangle langle" Why not bind to "M-m period"? While we're at it, Customization has a *very* short description of the bind files. (It says to look at the bind files to see how they work.) For example, how do I know what ~S means in a bind file? Or is there another doc where it's mentioned? -Amir
Re: displaymath vs. equation
On Thu, Mar 23, 2000 at 05:31:40PM +0100, Jean-Pierre.Chretien wrote: > > >>While we're at it, Customization has a *very* short description of the bind > >>files. (It says to look at the bind files to see how they work.) For > >>example, how do I know what ~S means in a bind file? Or is there another doc > >>where it's mentioned? > >> > > Chapter 4 of the Reference. > In fact, I wanted to build an inverse file (list of function and associated > bindings with french translations but I ended with an html version of > this 4th chapter (which can be indexed with the rest of the doc). Well, it is mentioned there, but it doesn't say there what ~S means either. And I think it really belongs in Customization, no? We definitely need to start a LyX Inc. company so we can hire someone to finish the Reference! -Amir
Bindings cont.
For those wondering what ~S in a bind-file means, from what I can tell, it would mean anything *except* shift. Except that according to the comments in kb_sequence::addkey, it's currently unused. By the way, the problem with using ~S for ">" is that on a standard American keyboard, you *have* to use the shift key to get a ">"! -Amir
RevTeX4
RevTeX 4, which is the American Physical Society's class(es) for LaTeX2e, is currently in its fourth beta, which they claim will be the last. Those of you who've been around for a while will recall that RevTeX 3 worked only with LaTeX209, which required various kludges to work with LyX. Happily, RevTeX 4 not only uses LaTeX2e, but also takes great strides towards using standard LaTeX2e: it now uses natbib and bibtex, and they've gotten rid of a number of special RevTeX commands in favor of the LaTeX commands. The latest beta seems to take it even further, by removing RevTeX commands in favor of the AMSTeX equivalents (which means LyX will support them even better). All of this means that it should be relatively easy to get R4 working with LyX. I wrote a revtex4.layout when they were in their first or second beta. Is there any possibility that someone could make the couple tweaks that might be required for the latest beta and then test it on some documents? (E.g., writing from scratch or importing into LyX from LaTeX!) Since revtex4.layouth is in the recent stable releases as well as CVS, all you need to do is install revtex4 (from http://publish.aps.org/revtex4/) and Options->Reconfigure your LyX and it should be working! I don't have that much time to play with it right now, and I don't have a lot of revtex docs sitting around either. However, I'd be happy to help with any specific problems that crop up. As I mentioned a year or so ago when R4 first came out, the APS folks seem at least slightly interested in LyX. I think computer-phobic physicists are a wonderful market for LyX, as most of them really don't want to have to learn LaTeX. A lot of people use RevTeX, and I suspect APS will be pushing more and more to do so. I'll bet we could get the APS to endorse LyX as an easier way to submit electronically, and that would be a real step towards LyX world domination. The cygwin port and the upcoming GUI independence can only help. I remember at least one person (Ben?) was playing with revtex4. Any takers? You don't have to be a LyX or LaTeX guru to do this; just someone who has used (or wants to use) RevTeX. -Amir
LyX vs. LaTeX question
Help!
I put \usepackage{cite} in the preamble of my thesis. It was working for a
while, and when I loaded up the thesis this morning, it wouldn't compile.
I'm getting an error for each \cite:
! Undefined control sequence.
\@make@cite@list ...\@B@citeB \relax \@citea {\bf
{?}}\let \@citea
\citepunc...
l.10 ...\cite{Decoursey94, Kreuer96, Chizhmakov96}
.
The control sequence at the end of the top line
of your error message was never \def'ed. If you have
misspelled it (e.g., `\hobx'), type `I' and the correct
spelling (e.g., `I\hbox'). Otherwise just continue,
and I'll forget about whatever was undefined.
I thought the problem had something to do with
\makeatletter, so I put \makeatother and \makeatletter around the
\usepackage command but it didn't seem to work.
Any ideas?
-Amir
ps please Cc me, I'm not on the list.
