From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Nicolas Richard" Subject: Re: how to insert fraction & integration Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2012 19:03:10 +0200 Message-ID: <87wqze9j1t.fsf@yahoo.fr> References: <87d3175by0.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> <3637.1348800284@alphaville> <87d316r6xu.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:40560) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1THdyQ-0007E4-TC for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Sep 2012 13:03:35 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1THdyO-0003nx-TZ for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Sep 2012 13:03:34 -0400 Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:56703) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1THdyO-0003nt-Mo for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Sep 2012 13:03:32 -0400 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1THdyO-0007UM-Nr for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Sep 2012 19:03:32 +0200 Received: from geodiff-mac3.ulb.ac.be ([164.15.131.113]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 28 Sep 2012 19:03:32 +0200 Received: from theonewiththeevillook by geodiff-mac3.ulb.ac.be with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 28 Sep 2012 19:03:32 +0200 List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org >>>>> "bzg" == Bastien writes: bzg> Hi Nick, Nick Dokos writes: >> $$...$$ is plain TeX, not LaTeX, and according to Lamport (p. >> 233), "... does not work properly." See also >> >> http://www.tex.ac.uk/cgi-bin/texfaq2html?label=dolldoll bzg> $$...$$ worked for me for years in LaTeX (using tetex on bzg> GNU/Linux) so I'm curious: is this FAQ entry still accurate? bzg> The web page says "2012-03-29" but maybe that's just an bzg> automated time-stamp, not telling whether this entry in bzg> particular is still relevant. It is, but the reasons are not so obvious. You can find some arguments here : In short : - without amsmath (but who does not load amsmath?), vertical spacing is wrong in some circumstances (which should never happen anyway : a displayed equation can never begin a new paragraph), and - with amsmath, some other problems remain, most notably the global option "fleqn" (flush left equations) does not work. In general, $$ should never be modified by any package, so if you load a package that should do something with displayed equations, you'd better not use $$ $$. Unfortunately I don't know which packages are in this situation. So, is it worth changing your code ? I personally never use $$ (nor \[ \]) (i) because I like having meaningful environment names, (ii) because I was taught not to use them, and (iii) because amsmath makes it easy to change a environement into another (e.g. change between numbered/unnumbered, or change between {equation} and {align}). -- Nicolas.