Rasmus gmx.us> writes:
>
> Nicolas Goaziou nicolasgoaziou.fr> writes:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > Rasmus gmx.us> writes:
> >
> >> What's wrong with equation (potentially coupled with mathtools for
> >> handling numbering automatically)? Is it worth breaking old documents
> >> (irrespective of org-l
Nicolas Goaziou writes:
> Hello,
>
> Rasmus writes:
>
>> What's wrong with equation (potentially coupled with mathtools for
>> handling numbering automatically)? Is it worth breaking old documents
>> (irrespective of org-lint) for this inconvenience?
>
> Actually, the idea behind this patch is
Hello,
Rasmus writes:
> What's wrong with equation (potentially coupled with mathtools for
> handling numbering automatically)? Is it worth breaking old documents
> (irrespective of org-lint) for this inconvenience?
Actually, the idea behind this patch is to mimic the expected LaTeX
behaviour,
Ethan Ligon writes:
> Nicolas Goaziou nicolasgoaziou.fr> writes:
>
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> The following patch changes status for \[..\] and $$...$$ from objects
>> to elements.
>>
>
> I think I've already indicated my enthusiastic support for this change, but
> let me do it again! In /The TeXbo
Nicolas Goaziou nicolasgoaziou.fr> writes:
>
> Hello,
>
> The following patch changes status for \[..\] and $$...$$ from objects
> to elements.
>
I think I've already indicated my enthusiastic support for this change, but
let me do it again! In /The TeXbook/ Donald Knuth writes that the mar
Hello,
The following patch changes status for \[..\] and $$...$$ from objects
to elements.
There are two consequences to this :
1. \[...\] and $$...$$ are not filled anymore with M-q.
2. \[...\] and $$...$$ cannot be inlined, i.e, they must start at the
beginning of a line.
In particu
