[sage-devel] Re: \Bold command definition in every LaTeX output

2021-12-21 Thread John H Palmieri
I have no objection to this, but the purpose for using \Bold{...} was to make its behavior easily customizable, since some people might want \mathbf{...} and some might want \mathbb{...}. Are you suggesting replacing \Bold in the latex() method for the object, or keeping it but doing the

Re: [sage-devel] Add more-itertools as a standard package

2021-12-21 Thread julian...@fsfe.org
Hi Samuel, This is a popular pure Python package. It seems to have a history of non-breaking releases, so I would not mind adding it if it makes our lives much easier (and keeps us from reinventing the wheel when implementing algorithms.) As a maintainer of SageMath in conda-forge, I don't

[sage-devel] Re: \Bold command definition in every LaTeX output

2021-12-21 Thread Matthias Koeppe
On Tuesday, December 21, 2021 at 2:49:11 AM UTC-8 Eric Gourgoulhon wrote: > Unless there might be a reason for it, why not replacing lines like > return r"\Bold{Q}" > by > return r"\mathbf{Q}" > in the relevant _latex_ methods ? > +1 -- You received this message because you are subscribed

Re: [sage-devel] Re: \Bold command definition in every LaTeX output

2021-12-21 Thread Dima Pasechnik
I would vote for updating our LaTeX methods to use more standard macros. On Tue, 21 Dec 2021, 10:49 Eric Gourgoulhon, wrote: > Hi, > > Le lundi 20 décembre 2021 à 12:06:05 UTC+1, AlbertHilb a écrit : > >> Problem solved! Thank you very much! >> > > That being said, it seems to me that these

[sage-devel] Re: \Bold command definition in every LaTeX output

2021-12-21 Thread Eric Gourgoulhon
Hi, Le lundi 20 décembre 2021 à 12:06:05 UTC+1, AlbertHilb a écrit : > Problem solved! Thank you very much! > That being said, it seems to me that these \newcommand{Bold} in each LaTeX output (!) are an unnecessary pollution of the Jupyter notebooks in %display latex mode. Unless there