I am trying to get the same source code to produce both the html pages and a pdf document. I think this is one of the advantages of sphinx ? I was not expecting the scope of commands to be different for the two cases, html and pdf.
I am using a file called preamble.rst to get my definitions for the entire document inside each html page (this includes other commands besides latex command). If I use the latex_elements as suggested above, I have to include the definitions in preamble.rst to build html files and remove them to build latexpdf files. While this doable, it would seem there should be a simpler way. Perhaps I should ask this with another conservation ? I have noticed something strange in the latexpdf output (now that I can get it) . The table of contents in the pdf file only seems to include the toctree command in the index.rst file, and not the toctree commands in other files that get included. I am using the Read The Docs theme and the htm_theme_options has 'titles_only' is set to True. On Thursday, August 13, 2020 at 12:16:22 AM UTC-7 jfbu wrote: > Hi, > > Le 12/08/2020 à 14:19, bradley...@gmail.com a écrit : > > The index.rst file below demonstrates that \newcommand does not work > with latexpdf. > > > > ------------ Below is my conf.py file ------------------------ > > # For conf.py documentation see > > # http://www.sphinx-doc.org/en/master/config > > # > > project = 'newcommand' > > extensions = [ > > 'sphinx.ext.mathjax', > > ] > > ------------- Below is my index.rst file ------------------------- > > Problem With \newcommand in latexpdf > > #################################### > > This file builds just file, > > and displays as intended, with ``make html``, > > but with ``make latexpdf`` it generates and > > ``Undefined control sequence.`` error for the > > macro ``\B``. > > > > Define Latex Macro > > ****************** > > ``:math: \newcommand{\B}[1]{{\bf #1}}`` > > :math:`\newcommand{\B}[1]{{\bf #1}}` > > > > Use Latex Macro \B > > ****************** > > ``:math: f : \B{R} \rightarrow \B{R}`` > > :math:`f : \B{R} \rightarrow \B{R}` > > > > the LaTeX has scope limiting constructs such as "environments" > but also equations, inclusive of inline mathematics > > (delimited in the file in LaTeX mark-up produced by make latex by \( ... > \) delimiters) > > you must locate the \newcommand outside of such scope delimited location > > either via > > .. raw:: latex > > \newcommand{\B}[1]{{\bf #1}} > > before it is used (and only once) > > or in conf.py > > latex_elements = { > 'preamble': r"\newcommand{\B}[1]{{\bf #1}}", > } > > which is a priori better location, recommended for that usage. > > > Once this is done do not put any other \newcommand{\B} as this will > generate an error. > > Notice that \bf mark-up has been deprecated by LaTeX developers > and perhaps {\mathbf{#1}} is more legit > > latex_elements = { > 'preamble': r"\newcommand{\B}[1]{\mathbf{#1}}", > } > > > or, if you use xelatex with unicode-math, perhaps \symbf > > > Besides LaTeX normative gurus will try to discourage you to define a > one-letter > command such as \B. (the rationale being that depending on language perhaps > the one-letter command has a meaning already ; anyway if it does the > \newcommand > will then raise an error so you will know). > > > Jean-François > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sphinx-users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sphinx-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sphinx-users/5ae0887c-7d93-4fa1-bdb7-63c0b8efd5dcn%40googlegroups.com.
