From ligges at statistik.uni-dortmund.de  Fri Nov 18 19:14:41 2005
From: ligges at statistik.uni-dortmund.de (Uwe Ligges)
Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 19:14:41 +0100
Subject: [Rd] problem with \eqn (PR#8322)
In-Reply-To: <437E11F7.6010604@cimr.cam.ac.uk>
References: <20051117215558.33EB422485@slim.kubism.ku.dk>	<437E0384.604@cimr.cam.ac.uk>	<17278.3526.762256.703178@stat.math.ethz.ch>
	<437E11F7.6010604@cimr.cam.ac.uk>
Message-ID: <437E1A11.3040308@statistik.uni-dortmund.de>

Hin-Tak Leung wrote:

> Martin Maechler wrote:
> 
>>>>>>>"Hin-Tak" == Hin-Tak Leung <hin-tak.leung at cimr.cam.ac.uk>
>>>>>>>   on Fri, 18 Nov 2005 16:38:28 +0000 writes:
>>
>>
>>    Hin-Tak> Your own fault. See below. It is basic LaTeX and any LaTeX person
>>    Hin-Tak> can tell you the answer...(most probably haven't bothered...)
>>
>>No.  Whereas I partly agree that it's Ross ``fault'' trying to
>>use too smart LaTex (and using outdated \bf instead of \mathbf), 
>>;-)
>>
>>The bug is really there, since we are talking about the Rd "language",
>>not LaTeX, an in Rd,  \eqn and \deqn are defined to have either
>>one or two arguments -- where Ross used the 2-argument version
>>correctly (in principle at least) --> See the manual "Writing R
>>Extensions".
> 
> 
> Forgive me for not reading R-ext carefully, but Ross's Rd code is
> still "obviously" wrong in the lights of the two-argument \eqn:
> (really doesn't differ from the 1-arg interpretaion of \eqn)
> 
> \eqn{{\bf\beta}_j}{\bf\beta}_jnormal-bracket5bracket-normal{b(j)}


No, that is the output after conversion, please read the original 
poster's mail more carefully.

Uwe Ligges


> In other words,
> \eqn{...}{...}_...
> 
> and the "_" is still outside of any maths environment, which is most
> probably not Ross's intention.
> 
> 
>>
>>    >> Full_Name: Ross Boylan
>>    >> Version: 2.2.0
>>    >> OS: Linux
>>    >> Submission from: (NULL) (65.175.48.58)
>>    >> 
>>    >> 
>>    >> \eqn{{\bf\beta}_j}{b(j)} in my .Rd file produces this error
>>
>>    >> --------------------------------------------
>>    >> ! Missing $ inserted.
>>    >> <inserted text> 
>>    >> $
>>    >> l.7 \eqn{{\bf\beta}_j}{\bf\beta}_jnormal-bracket5bracket-normal{b(j)}
>>
>>    Hin-Tak> \eqn{{\bf\beta}_j} is already syntactically complete, so latex
>>    Hin-Tak> complains the next "_" is not in maths mode, and automatically
>>    Hin-Tak> switch into maths mode for you (the $ inserted message) You have
>>    Hin-Tak> to match all the braces - you need 3 right-braces after \eqn,
>>    Hin-Tak> like this, at least:
>>
>>    Hin-Tak> \eqn{  {  {\bf\beta
>>    Hin-Tak> }_j
>>    Hin-Tak> }
>>    Hin-Tak> {\bf\beta
>>    Hin-Tak> }_ ....
>>    Hin-Tak> {b(j)
>>    Hin-Tak> }
>>    Hin-Tak> }
> 
> 
> ______________________________________________
> R-devel at r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel



[Rd] problem with \eqn (PR#8322)
Uwe Ligges