On 2012-07-22, Allen Barker wrote:
> On 07/20/2012 03:40 AM, Guenter Milde wrote:
>> Also, math-macros are document specific - defining a math-macro in one
>> document does not make it available in other ones. This is why my
>> documents include a file of commonly used math macros -- just like I
>>
From: Richard Heck [rgh...@lyx.org]
Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2012 10:20 AM
>So the attached shows a way around this problem. The difference between \test
>and \lest
>doesn't show up inside LyX, but it does in the output.
Is there any way to put these inside a preview inset?
Scott
On 07/21/2012 11:34 PM, Allen Barker wrote:
On 07/20/2012 03:40 AM, Guenter Milde wrote:
Also, math-macros are document specific - defining a math-macro in one
document does not make it available in other ones. This is why my
documents include a file of commonly used math macros -- just like I
\
On 07/20/2012 03:40 AM, Guenter Milde wrote:
Also, math-macros are document specific - defining a math-macro in one
document does not make it available in other ones. This is why my
documents include a file of commonly used math macros -- just like I
\input a file with commonly used preamble defi
On 2012-07-19, ralston wrote:
> I've got 10 years experience and 200 documents using LaTex with heavy
> math. Like everyone else I paste a clot of \newcommands into my Latex
> preamble without looking at it.
> My student has recommended Lyx, which I appreciate has many great
> features. I reall
>
> > A "show output anyway" button would be great.
> > However, if LyX consistency were assured, there's no need for it (expect
> > when using ERT).
>
> ... or the LaTeX preamble (1) or an outdated TeX distribution (2) or a
> package
> combination with conflicts (3) or ... (?)
>
> Günter
>
I repe
On 2011-05-11, Diego Queiroz wrote:
> [-- Type: text/plain, Encoding: --]
>> But the only one for truly consistent behaviour. If you want to export
>> stand-alone, uncheck the master setting.
> Even if the master setting is not set in the child, LyX still display all
> macros perfectly if the
>
> But the only one for truly consistent behaviour. If you want to export
> stand-alone, uncheck the master setting.
>
Even if the master setting is not set in the child, LyX still display all
macros perfectly if the master document is open.
My complaint is this: if LyX is able to interpret thing
On 2011-05-10, Diego Queiroz wrote:
>> >>> For truly consistent behaviour, we would have to disable stand-alone
>> >>> compilation of documents setting a master (except for "included" (vs.
>> >>> "input") documents).
> This is a strong restriction.
But the only one for truly consistent behaviour
>
> >>> For truly consistent behaviour, we would have to disable stand-alone
> >>> compilation of documents setting a master (except for "included" (vs.
> >>> "input") documents).
>
This is a strong restriction.
With this, in a document with thousand of pages I will obligated to generate
all pages
On 05/10/2011 09:09 AM, Guenter Milde wrote:
> On 2011-05-10, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
>> Guenter Milde wrote:
>>> For truly consistent behaviour, we would have to disable stand-alone
>>> compilation of documents setting a master (except for "included" (vs.
>>> "input") documents).
>> Why this? I
On 2011-05-10, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
> Guenter Milde wrote:
>> For truly consistent behaviour, we would have to disable stand-alone
>> compilation of documents setting a master (except for "included" (vs.
>> "input") documents).
> Why this? I have many documents with a master set that get comp
Guenter Milde wrote:
> For truly consistent behaviour, we would have to disable stand-alone
> compilation of documents setting a master (except for "included" (vs.
> "input") documents).
Why this? I have many documents with a master set that get compiled stand-
alone from time to time and should _
On 2011-05-09, Diego Queiroz wrote:
>> But what if you really want to compile it as a standalone document?
>> People do this.
>> Richard
> But if it was really a standalone document, I would have to unset master
> document property, right?
...
> I am just looking for a more "user oriented be
>
> Yes I am able to do what you describe in 1.6. In your example child doc,
> you did not set the master setting, did you?
>
Indeed.
I was in a hurry and I forgot it. ;/
---
Diego Queiroz
On 05/09/2011 02:38 PM, Julien Rioux wrote:
>
> Yes I am able to do what you describe in 1.6. In your example child
> doc, you did not set the master setting, did you? But anyway, I
> corrected it and still in 2.1.0svn the compilation of the child is
> broken:
>
> Undefined control sequence \anymac
On 09/05/2011 2:23 PM, Diego Queiroz wrote:
Which workaround? You said math macros don't work within child docs, I say
they work for me. No workaround necessary.
Maybe I misunderstood you.
I was citing your workaround to include bibtex in the childs.
"I use a branch named "child only", whic
>
> Which workaround? You said math macros don't work within child docs, I say
> they work for me. No workaround necessary.
>
Maybe I misunderstood you.
I was citing your workaround to include bibtex in the childs.
>> "I use a branch named "child only", which is activated in child docs but
deacti
On 09/05/2011 1:44 PM, Diego Queiroz wrote:
So, I do not experience your problem. However document settings and stuff
that gets defined in the preamble need to be set in both master and child
docs.
--
Julien
Actually, the answer is: yes, you do experience the very same problem.
Otherwise you
On 09/05/2011 1:44 PM, Diego Queiroz wrote:
So, I do not experience your problem. However document settings and stuff
that gets defined in the preamble need to be set in both master and child
docs.
--
Julien
Actually, the answer is: yes, you do experience the very same problem.
Otherwise you
>
> So, I do not experience your problem. However document settings and stuff
> that gets defined in the preamble need to be set in both master and child
> docs.
> --
> Julien
>
Actually, the answer is: yes, you do experience the very same problem.
Otherwise you won't need to go after a workaround
On 09/05/2011 10:22 AM, Diego Queiroz wrote:
I'm not sure if this is a bug report or a feature request. Probably the
second one.
In LyX it's ok to define a Math Macro in a Master document and use it in a
child one. It's also ok to use math macros that are defined in a child and
use it in other c
>
> But what if you really want to compile it as a standalone document?
> People do this.
>
> Richard
>
But if it was really a standalone document, I would have to unset master
document property, right?
Anyway, in my case, the problem is that my child document with the macros
also define Nomencla
On 05/09/2011 11:05 AM, Diego Queiroz wrote:
>
>> If you want to compile just one chapter as part of a larger document,
>> then you need to use the \includeonly support, accessible from
>> Document>Settings.
> I was not aware of this feature. Thanks for the hint.
>
It's new in 2.0.0.
> But it is a
>
> If you ask to compile just the child, then you are asking to compile it
> as a standalone document, so it is no surprise that this does not work.
>
Exactly. :-)
> If you want to compile just one chapter as part of a larger document,
> then you need to use the \includeonly support, accessibl
On 05/09/2011 10:22 AM, Diego Queiroz wrote:
> I'm not sure if this is a bug report or a feature request. Probably the
> second one.
>
> In LyX it's ok to define a Math Macro in a Master document and use it in a
> child one. It's also ok to use math macros that are defined in a child and
> use it i
Thanks. It works.
Murtaza
On Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 5:46 AM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
wrote:
> Le 30 déc. 09 à 09:59, Murtaza Safri a écrit :
>
>> I am typing in a lot of math macros. I wanted to group them together
>> inside foldable box to improve readability and manageability afforded
>> by folding
Le 30 déc. 09 à 09:59, Murtaza Safri a écrit :
I am typing in a lot of math macros. I wanted to group them together
inside foldable box to improve readability and manageability afforded
by folding the inset box. So I put in a lot of the macros inside Lyx
grey note. However, the output has a lot
On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 12:23 AM, Dan Kilman wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> I am using LyX 1.6.5 on Windows XP installed via the alternative installer.
>
> When I define math macros, they seem to be working just fine while editing
> the document (that is, I can use them).
> However, when I try to view th
Am 07.04.2008 um 11:44 schrieb G. Milde:
Dear LyX users,
for my thesis, I define a set of about 20 math-macros that reside in a
well commented file math-macros.lyx that is included by the document
file(s).
When I open the document file before opening the math-macro.lyx
file, all
macros will
Nick Kuzmik wrote:
I do a lot of math in lyx, and I create a lot of macros on the fly.
What's the best way to keep them organized? Maybe make it so every
file I open has all the same macros?
The way I've handled this is to create a special file, macros.lyx, which
contains my standard math-mac
On Sunday 15 October 2006 19:56, Nick Kuzmik wrote:
> I do a lot of math in lyx, and I create a lot of macros on the fly. What's
> the best way to keep them organized? Maybe make it so every file I open
> has all the same macros?
In .lyx/bind/ directory you will find a lot of files, there you can
On Sun, Feb 16, 2003 at 08:20:21PM -0500, William O. Bray wrote:
> Hello, let me append my last post. The real workaround is to simply put your
> macro as a \newcommand in the preamble and save the doc.
You lose all the visual feedback using this method.
Andre'
--
Those who desire to give up F
On Sun, Feb 16, 2003 at 08:05:54PM -0500, William O. Bray wrote:
> Hello, I am using Lyx 1.3 with qt frontend.
> suppose you want a macro for \a^{#1} where #1 is user input.
> In the doc mini-buffer one would type, e.g.,
> math-macro ax 1 (enter)
> This brings up the macro box in the Lyx doc; in th
On Sat, 9 Jun 2001 00:50:20 +0300 wrote Dekel Tsur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Fri, Jun 08, 2001 at 08:44:47AM +0200, Jean-Pierre.Chretien wrote:
> > >>The math-macro definitions have the advantage that they are expanded and
> > >>appear in WYSIWM mode (a LyX perk!).
The LyX-math-macro has the di
On Fri, Jun 08, 2001 at 08:44:47AM +0200, Jean-Pierre.Chretien wrote:
> >>The math-macro definitions have the advantage that they are expanded and
> >>appear in WYSIWM mode (a LyX perk!). However, there seems to be no
> >>mechanism for saving the math-macro definitions as part of a standard
> >>t
>>Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 23:41:19 -0700 (PDT)
>>From: Michael P Friedlander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>Subject: math-macros
>>
>>I just started using LyX, and even after a few hours, it's clear that it's
>>a great advance over using LaTeX directly, even with great packages lik
On 21-Apr-99 Etienne Grossmann wrote:
> indeed, LyX "sees" all the macros that have been defined in all
> its open documents (and apparently in those it has closed too).
>
> Sorry for not having thought about that ...
That's ok -- now that it is known, it can be fixed! :) It might
> "John" == John Ya-ya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
John> I did that and it works. However, in so doing I was
John> inspired to try changing the *Style* of the line on which I had
John> defined the macro, and I discovered something. A math macro
John> must be defined using the "Stand
Hello again,
indeed, LyX "sees" all the macros that have been defined in all
its open documents (and apparently in those it has closed too).
Sorry for not having thought about that ...
Etienne
On 21-Apr-99 Etienne Grossmann wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> so, you do "M-x msol" , then write a 'm' with a dot, then use,
> in math-mode, the macro '\msol', which appears fine on the screen,
> but LaTeX won't compile? Strange indeed.
Exactly. Well, not exactly -- "M-x math-macro msol",
John Ya-ya wrote:
>
> It seemed to me that this would allow me to define a macro, say "msol", to save
> me from having to type a lot when I want to insert the M-with-subscripted-odot
> that represents a "solar mass". Ok, I defined the macro as directed, and went
> into a math box and typed "\mso
Hello,
so, you do "M-x msol" , then write a 'm' with a dot, then use,
in math-mode, the macro '\msol', which appears fine on the screen,
but LaTeX won't compile? Strange indeed.
Could you create a short file, with e.g. just the macro definition
and an instance of it, check whether LaTeX s
43 matches
Mail list logo
