Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote:
> > As to the proposed patch, I'd like to hear the opinion of math users.
>
> After some further investigation I found out that the bug was introduced
> in changeset 10553: "Output \\ at the end of the last line if it is
> empty (fixes bug 2067)". This is wrong, because outputting an extra "\\"
> would mean that you really add an extra row. In the example of bug 2969,
> this is visible because this extra line gets a number. In the first part
> of the patch I reverted this change. I have no clue where bug 2067 is
> about. Juergen, you can probably help me out here (it's your bug). At
> least I can't seem to reproduce.
No idea. This is 4 years back, and I'm actually surprised I've ever reported a
mathed bug (I guess I was just recording a user report from the list).
However, your explanations strike me sensible. Just check the reported undo
bug doesn't come back.
> > However, I think our current LaTeX output can be improved anyway. I think
> > new rows should always be started on a new line. I.e.,
> > \begin{align*}
> > a & = & b & = & c\\
> > \\
> > x & = & y & = & z\end{align*}
> > not
> > \begin{align*}
> > a & = & b & = & c\\
> > \\x & = & y & = & z\end{align*}
> >
>
> This is also corrected in the attached patch. Please note the explicit
> comment added there: "append newline only if line wasn't completely
> empty and this was not the last line in the grid". I always hate
> reverting things that have such an explicit comment.
>
> Is there a reason for not ouputting this:
>
> \begin{align*}
> a & = & b & = & c\\
> \\
> x & = & y & = & z
> \end{align*}
No idea either. Does it make a difference wrt the indendation of subsequent
paragraphs?
Jürgen
