equations revamped #483
equations revamped #483
Conversation
| First PDF in this branch: |
| fixes #470 |
| Julie requested some space between ) and x. There were five occurrences of this in 2.5.3. I have added a "think space" using , between ) and x: Not sure if this is a good move. Here is the result. See pages 180 and 184 (including footnote 55). Here is the resulting sicpjs.pdf of this branch: |
| @TobiasWrigstad can you review this PR? |
| @martin-henz I liked the thin spaces but it seems they were removed almost immediately? How come? |
| \[k_1f(n) \leq R(n) \leq k_2f(n)\] | ||
| \[ | ||
| \begin{array}{lll} | ||
| k_1f(n) & \leq & R(n) \quad \leq \quad k_2f(n) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Very minor comment: the subscripts of k overlap with the serif of the f. Moving from k_1 and k_2 to e.g. k and k' would solve this.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not proposing that we make that change. Just pointing it out.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I've added thin spaces , after k_1 and k_2 to avoid the overlap. This now looks the same as in SICP.
| {\left[ (y+1)x^2 +(y^2 +1)x+(y-1)\right]\cdot \left[(y-2) | ||
| x+(y^3 +7)\right]} | ||
| \begin{array}{l} | ||
| {\left[ (y+1)x^2 +(y^2 +1)x+(y-1)\right]\cdot \left[(y-2)x+(y^3 +7)\right]} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I thought the thin space looked good.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, the explanation is in the email. Let's LaTeX do this and not micro-manage, unless we have to, as in the case of k_1 f(...) and k_2 f(...)
| propagates its value through the network as described above. This | ||
| sets <SCHEMEINLINE>F</SCHEMEINLINE> to 77, which is reported by the probe | ||
| on <SCHEMEINLINE>F</SCHEMEINLINE>. | ||
| on<SPACE/><SCHEMEINLINE>F</SCHEMEINLINE>. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good addition with the hard space.
| Then the required stream may be constructed with | ||
| <SCHEMEINLINE>merge</SCHEMEINLINE>, as follows: | ||
| <SNIPPET EVAL="no" LATEX="yes" POSTPADDING="no"> | ||
| <SNIPPET EVAL="no" LATEX="yes"> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for catching this one!
| Sorry about the delay. |
Not sure how "thin spaces" disappeared. Is it because we moved to "array" instead of just [ ]? |
Ah, yes. The reason is in the emails. I want to let LaTeX take care of the spacing. Manually inserting them seems like an overkill to me. We would have to go through the whole book to get a uniform manual spacing. That would be a waste of time, I think. An exception: When LaTeX does an obviously poor job, as in the case of k_1 f(...) and k_2 f(...). |
No description provided.