Enrico Forestieri wrote:
On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 11:01:26PM +0100, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 10:30:41AM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Enrico Forestieri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
The attached patch is better, IMO. There's no reason to require
the \boldsymbol definition every time a math inset is used.
Looks good IMO.
I think that this needs to be discussed some more. ATM, we have
support for bold math through two different ways:
1) Via InsetMathBoldSymbol.cpp and \boldsymbol
a) When amsmath is not loaded, LyX provides a custom definition.
b) Otherwise, the definition of \boldsymbol provided by amsmath
is used.
2) Via InsetMathBM.cpp and \bm
Method 1a) is flawed and should be ditched. Method 2) is better and
produces correct results whether or not amsmath is loaded.
However, note that both 1) and 2) provide the same exact functionality,
so I don't understand why it was done in such a way. I think that the
two methods should be merged as done in the attached patch and
propose to do the same in 1.5.x, i.e., providing \boldsymbol through
the bm.sty package.
It seems that nobody has an opinion,
or maybe everybody trust your opinion on this ;-)
Abdel
