On Thu, Jun 27, 2002 at 01:36:50PM +0300, Dekel Tsur wrote: > On Thu, Jun 27, 2002 at 10:57:18AM +0100, Jules Bean wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 27, 2002 at 12:26:17PM +0300, Dekel Tsur wrote: > > > > > > The math editor already gives a good approximation on hour your formulae > > > will look, so the need for a preview is much less needed than in emacs. > > > In fact, in my opinion, the change in display that is performed when > > > opening a formula (switching from the preview display to the mathed display) > > > is a little distracting. > > > But this is only my opinion. > > > > You obviously don't use as much maths as me ;) > > Really? > On my thesis files (which BTW, I finished writing today) > grep "begin_inset Formula" */*lyx | wc -l > > 7422
:-) OK, you've obviously been happy with LyX's subset of maths features, then. > > > This feature looks like it could be the feature which causes me to > > switch back from emacs to LyX again, which ought to be some kind of > > recommendation :) I frequently use constructs which LyX's mathed > > doesn't understand, and I'd love to see them rendered... > > I hope we will support 99% of math constructs some day. > What constructs that you use are not supported currently ? At the moment, primarily prooftrees and 'mathlig' (a package which I wrote to allow me to use shorthands like |- for the \vdash symbol). In the past it was commutative diagrams (which I typset in xypic). Almost every single chunk of math in my work uses features LyX doesn't suport ;) Preview Lyx would allow me to at least see pretty renderings of the ERT LyX doesn't like. Jules
