First login?
Lost password?
 
 
 
mailing-list for TeXmacs Users

Text archives Help


Re: Conditional definition of Scheme functions and typesetting of trees


Chronological Thread 
  • From: Giovanni Piredda <address@hidden>
  • To: address@hidden
  • Subject: Re: Conditional definition of Scheme functions and typesetting of trees
  • Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 12:45:33 +0100

Am 18.11.2020 um 00:57 schrieb Massimiliano Gubinelli:
Dear Giovanni,

independently of the way you achieve this, I do not understand what it is
useful for in your application. Why you want to change the appearence of the
* according to whether you are in an equation or not? Cannot you simply say
that all the unit of measure are in math mode? For example, usually when I
type numbers which have a matematical meaning I always initiate an equation.

Max


Hi Max,

you are right on this, I did not think it through but followed the idea which was already in my mind, that is separate units in a compound units expression with "asterisk" if in math and stretchable space (0.5spc) if in text. I can first enter math, then enter the macro.

Said this, maybe it still helps to learn how to do conditional typesetting. In this case it could help improve the macro, in the following way: you type always the same thing, whether in text or in math, and the macro itself will switch to math if it is itself placed in text ("itself", not the cursor).

I have found the file where I had tested the Scheme commands to retrieve the position of the tree (it is in a directory "test trees" which is inside the directory where I keep all TeXmacs tests, which also has "test" in its name ;-) ), they are adapted from an example in the Scheme developers' manual, and it looks like it does what I want. Will probably ask for more help on the topic.

I have in mind as a model LaTeX's siunitx, and I am going to try and look for how the parts of a physical quantity are spaced there (can't figure it out from LaTeX's code, am not proficient enough, and did not yet find an explanation on the Internet). My idea right now is that the spacing between number and unit should be larger than between the unit symbols; for example (if we were typesetting in text!) 1spc between number and units and 0.5spc between units. Any ideas?

G.




On 18. Nov 2020, at 00:37, Giovanni Piredda <address@hidden> wrote:

Hi Max,

I think I understand it now (I will try it tomorrow). Thanks for the
explanation.

I have a memory of seeing a procedure that finds out if a tree is inside a
math environment, and that I have even tested it, but I need to find it again.

Perhaps that is the way to achieve what I would like to achieve (typesetting
something in a way that depends on where it is, and not in a way that depends
on where *the cursor* is), but I first need to find it again in the
documentation).

G.


On 18.11.20 00:32, Massimiliano Gubinelli wrote:
As an example, try to use my macro and then create an equation and enter it with the cursor, then make "Update all"
(Shift+Cmr+R) and you will see that the value of all the instances of the macro will change to "+++". If now you go
with the cursor on the text and then you do again "Update all", then all the instances change to "xxxx".
This depends where the cursor is, not where the macro are called. And "Update all" just force TeXmacs to rexpand all
the document from the start.

Best
Max


On 18. Nov 2020, at 00:29, Massimiliano Gubinelli <address@hidden> wrote:

Dear Giovanni,
my understanding of the matter can be wrong (or not totally correct) however
is as follows:

1) In order to display your document, TeXmacs need to transform the document
tree into a series of boxes which indicate where and what put on the screen
or on the paper. This transformation go thru several phases, one of which is
the macro expansion phase, i.e. markup in the document is evaluated until
primitive markup is reached, which then allows to compute boxes and the
material which will eventually end up on your screen.

2) Every time the document is modified, for example by the user editing it
inserting some text in some position of the document tree, TeXmacs perform
the computations in 1) to transform the modified document tree into a new
sequence of rendering instructions.

3) If you put some \extern markup in the document, then when TeXmacs tries to
expand that markup it (by definition) goes on by calling the scheme procedure
and replacing the \extern markup with the result of the scheme procedure.
Now, the scheme procedure does not have *any* informations on where the
\extern markup was in the document tree. So scheme cannot know if we were in
an equation or in a piece of text.

Your confusion is to believe that in-math? returns true in a situation where
you use \extern inside an equation. This is not true, in my understanding.

in-math? is true only if the *editor* is in math mode, that is your cursor is
inside an equation. This is a global mode of the editor and if it happens
that your macro is evaluated again at that moment, then the predicate returns
true, but this does not depend on the position of your \extern in the
document tree, but on the current position of the cursor at the moment
TeXmacs tries to recompute that part of the tree.

Maybe this description is not totally correct (I'm not sure how and when
exaclty TeXmacs goes to a reexpansion of the macros) but seems coherent with
the bizzare behaviour of your macros.

Also try \extern with a procedure of the form

(define (myfunc) (if (in-math?) "+++" "xxxx")))
to see how, even when you put it in regular text, you can have "+++" if,
right away you then enter into math mode.

HTH,
Max



On 17. Nov 2020, at 23:29, Giovanni Piredda <address@hidden> wrote:

I am going to answer your previous message (thanks for that by the way) but
before that: I do not follow the explanation in this message on the in-math?
predicate, I have an idea of what you might mean, but maybe the idea is wrong
:-)

Let me write it down here.

Starting from:

"As I open the file, where I have the macro (which calls Scheme code via
extern) both inside math and outside math, they are all executed as if in text
mode.

If I edit one of them, now the predicate in-math? has effect."

you say that when I open the file TeXmacs is only typesetting (and therefore
uses the default function, as (in math?) returns always #f), but when I am
editing TeXmacs knows what I am editing and lets Scheme know. Is it that?

The follow-up question in this case is how can I obtain what I want, that is
a different function being called ever time the macro is executed, that is
also at the opening of the file. The aim seems sensible to me - typesetting
something in one way when in math and in one way when in text (as I said
above, now it is working when I write/edit, it is not working if I close and
open again a document).

Besides, doing Document->Update all hangs the document for a one/two minutes
(Ubuntu 20.10, I observed it in another document too), makes the macros work
well (upright in math, no asterisks, so it is recognizing the math), which is
pretty surprising, but destroys the page setup (margins are lost).

G.


On 17.11.20 22:50, Massimiliano Gubinelli wrote:
Going back to your attempt: I think that the predicate in-math? cannot be
used to check whether the typesetter is working on an equation or not. No
information is passed to Scheme about the internal status of the typesetter
when you call a \extern markup. You can pass informations only via
parameters. So your unitSpacer has no way to know if the evaluation is inside
some math markup or not.

The predicates in-math?, etc.. are just to check if the editor is in text,
prog, or math mode, for example. Thats is completely separate on the status
of the typesetter.

HTH,

Max



On 17. Nov 2020, at 19:25, Giovanni Piredda <address@hidden> wrote:

I post this here because I think that while being about Scheme in TeXmacs is
still of general interest. I have found a way of circumventing both issues
(which may be ok, in case I will ask about this in another post) but I am
curious to know the reason of the behaviours I observe.

First issue.

I have defined a Scheme function with the following:

(tm-define (unitSpacer) ; default, will be used in regular text
`(hspace "0.5spc"))
(tm-define (unitSpacer)
(:require (in-math?))
"*")

As far as I understand, the first definition is the default and it is
overridden by the second when I am in math.

In my tests, this happens only in open documents. At the first opening of a
document, only the first definition is used. Does anyone have a hint on what
is happening? Developers ;-) ?

===

Second issue.

In math mode, the program I wrote outputs groups of letters, each wrapped in a
<with|math-font-shape|right primitive, and interleaved with the character "*".

Example of output, copied from the terminal using (display ...)

<tree 2 <with|math-font-shape|right|kg>*<with|math-font-shape|right|m>>

I call this from a TeXmacs macro in math mode and I get a typeset output
where the asterisk appears as such (while I would like it to be interpreted
as an implicit multiplication)

If I copy the output from the terminal, strip the outermost <tree primitive
and place it inside a math primitive (opening the .tm file with a text editor)
the asterisks do not appear (as I thought they shouldn't).

Again, suggestions?



Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.19.

Top of page