Re: [Texmacs-dev] Fwd: TeXmacs: why is \ensuremath needed for conversion to LaTeX

[TeXmacs]

Hi Max,

Yes, we can decide in most cases.  But LaTeX is hairy, as always,
and not very robust.  We don't want the LaTeX compilation to fail
in 1% of the cases in which something may have gone wrong.

Best wishes, --Joris


On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 09:26:24AM +0200, Massimiliano Gubinelli wrote:
> Hi Joris, Hi all,
>  wrt. to the reply below: is not known to TeXmacs whether we are in LaTeX 
> math mode or not? We should be able to precompute this and avoid \ensuremath 
> all the way (apart from macro definitions). Or there are some issues there?
> 
> Best
> Max
> 
> ps:  I've moved the discussion to texmacs-dev.
> 
> 
> > Begin forwarded message:
> > 
> > From: TeXmacs <texmacs@lix.polytechnique.fr>
> > Subject: Re: TeXmacs: why is \ensuremath needed for conversion to LaTeX
> > Date: 7. May 2021 at 17:46:26 CEST
> > To: texmacs-users@texmacs.org
> > Reply-To: TeXmacs <texmacs@lix.polytechnique.fr>
> > 
> > Hi Frank,
> > 
> > For a systematic export tool, it is better to be redundant than
> > as tight as possible, but occasionally buggy.
> > 
> > The LaTeX export should be robust with respect to user errors,
> > such as using a mathematical primitive in text mode.
> > In my test files, such errors are rare, but they occur,
> > and we don't want them to break the conversion.
> > 
> > Best wishes, --Joris
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > On Fri, May 07, 2021 at 05:30:27PM +0200, Frank wrote:
> >> Dear all,
> >> 
> >> I spotted that the tex file converted from TeXmacs is filled with 
> >> \ensuremath{\operatorname{...}}. I wonder why the \ensuremath is needed. 
> >> This seems redundant in my document.
> >> 
> >> Best wishes,
> >> Frank
> 

> _______________________________________________
> Texmacs-dev mailing list
> Texmacs-dev@gnu.org
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/texmacs-dev