mailing-list for TeXmacs Users

[TeXmacs <address@hidden>]

Hi Pierre-Henri,

On Sat, Jul 03, 2021 at 07:13:36AM +0200, Pierre-Henri Jondot wrote:
> Some very minor quibbles :
> The choices being made to "fuse together" formulas or not is sometimes a 
> bit surprising to me. I am getting used to them, but that is not to say 
> that I embrace them :
> Writing a lot of exercises and solutions at the moment, I am often in the 
> process of adding to the left of some formula, some other things, 
> definitions, other arguments... If the cursor is just to the left of a 
> formula, then hitting $ does not begin a new formula, separate from the one 
> to the immediate right, but instead the cursor goes inside the existing 
> formula to the right. So in this case, $ is redondant with the right arrow 
> key. Not a big problem obviously, as I just need to remember to place some 
> separation, such as a space, before hitting $ (because after it is too 
> late, the formula cannot be split into two separate formulas). Still I 
> would prefer in this instance the $ key to begin a new formula, distinct 
> from the one immediately to the right of the cursor.

Yes, I introduced the fusing behavior after noting that a lot of users
tended to create meaningless empty formulas before or after other formulas.
I agree that this is counterintuitive from a structural point of view,
but it avoids this very common type of error.

> At the opposite, I use a lot of copy-paste in formulas (this is really 
> great), and if I want to extend a formula by pasting another formula, at 
> the beginning or the end of one formula, I must be very careful that the 
> cursor is inside the formula to be extended, else the two formulas will 
> appear as two separate formulas (which structurally is not nice, and it 
> prevents to select and copy the entire formula, as it is not one formula, 
> but two of them)

Yes, one has to be careful about cursor positioning.
At least all cursor positions are available,
so I guess that this is just a matter of habit.

> Last thing : it looks more like a (tiny) bug than a design decision : when 
> I want to enter this kind of integral :

Note that the integral does not show up in all email clients.

> then the Ctrl-F shortcut for the upper bound will be ignored once, which is 
> not the case for the lower bound. The same is true for the square root 
> shortcut Ctrl-S and the same behaviour applies to the discrete sum.

I don't understand.  If I do "S-F5 ^ C-f" (assuming the MacOS look and feel),
then I indeed start a fraction in the superscript.  Same if I do "\ i n t 
return ^ C-f".

Best wishes, --Joris