mailing-list for TeXmacs Users

[TeXmacs <address@hidden>]

Hi Giovanni,

The explanations of Max are essentially correct.
You need to distinguish between scheme routines that
are useful for editing a document (like in-math?) and
TeXmacs macros and external scheme routines that are
useful for typesetting a document.

You typically don't want to make external typesetting macros
conditional on information that is not already in the macro
arguments (although there can be exceptions to this rule,
which we can discuss on texmacs-dev).

If you want an external macro to do something that depends on
the current mode (text/math/...), then you should simply pass
the current mode (<value|mode>) as an additional argument to
your external macro.

Examples for the use of Scheme from within TeXmacs can
be found in "The Jolly Writer", Chapter 14.

Best wishes, --Joris



On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 12:45:33PM +0100, Giovanni Piredda wrote:
> 
> 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?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>