@Speravir I used to be a ref, in my young years. I wish there were those braille helpers at the tima, I always had difficulties in finding the locker room. ;-)

@egreg LOL.

Other news: I just searched and found the source of an IMO AWESOME image (attention, animation): zy0rg.deviantart.com/art/Clockwork-300583438

I was browsing apps in the Play Store and had the idea of searching for latex. Oh my.

@PauloCereda Yes, especially when searching for "fun" applications ;-)

@StephanLehmke :)

Interestingly, "latex bugs" gives only relevant search results on google. As if we were a grumpy bunch.

@StephanLehmke Exactly. :)

Wait when the L3 team starts dealing with namespaces with the new Preemptive Ontology for Runtime Namespaces approach, aka PORN. Searching for latex porn will be an adventure. :)

@JosephWright: I'm good at naming things, aren't I? :P

@PauloCereda if you attach your name to latex sources, you don't even need to search, they send you the information automatically...

@DavidCarlisle Oh.

@PauloCereda I'm sure you can explain it all to Stefan's Grandma.

@DavidCarlisle Nope. :)

Ooops

I meant to add a newline

Hello everybody, anyway!

@AndrewZabavnikov Hi

@AndrewZabavnikov Aloha!

There is strong wish in me not to post the following as question. The thing is i read that there is no way to write a command like in that question tex.stackexchange.com/a/7524/37049

Is there a way to define one that would insert a cs after full expansion of next macro

?

@AndrewZabavnikov sorry your question isn't very clear "full expansion" could have several meanings as well) you can insert a csname token and then do \romanunmeral expansion of the previous one as described in the answer you reference, do you want something else?

I mean macro should be 'recognized' by TeX, then arguments should be captured, then macro should be expanded, then my token should be inserted.

That's not to answer your question...

@David: did you see how many people use Linux in my city? :P linuxcounter.net/places/stats/BR/Analandia.html

@AndrewZabavnikov I'm not sure what you mean but try this:

\def\foo#1{\romannumeral-`0#1\zzz}


\def\zzz{hello}

\def\test#1{(#1)}

\foo\test

\bye

\foo inserts \zzz after the expansion of its argument.

@David I have just understood, that for my purpose it would not be enough to get just expansion. I need actual execution (since macro expansion can have a dangling macro call at the end of it, maybe within an \if).

@PauloCereda yes you showed that the other day, but I don't believe the numbers I tried Oxford and it didn't come very hight, there must be thousands of students here....

What I meant is this usecase

@DavidCarlisle Oh they must be hiding. :)

\def\some#1{olala#1}

@AndrewZabavnikov what do you want to happen to \some ?

@David \insertafter\mytoken\some{thing} -> olalathing\mytoken

@AndrewZabavnikov \def\insertafter#1#2#3{#2{#3}#1

Would not work for \def\another#1#2#3#4...#n{something happening here}

I meant for postponing insertion of my token until next token gets expanded.

But as I wrote even that would not actually help :-( Execution is obviously required for

@AndrewZabavnikov In the general case you can't. TeX has no notion of "the expansion ends here". It just replaces the macro and its arguments with the replacement text and carries on from the first token it finds.

@egreg That's true even for expansion, let alone execution?

@AndrewZabavnikov yes (there are not separate expansion and execution steps really, they are intertwined)

@AndrewZabavnikov A "real case" might be useful.

@DavidCarlisle But there is such a thing as unexpandable tokens which are meant to be left alone in token stream until executed, right?

@AndrewZabavnikov the word execute isn't used but yes, more or less. characters such as x for example.

@AndrewZabavnikov Why? \def\gobble#1{}\gobble\char would remove \char (which is unexpandable). If TeX finds a token that's unexpandable it sends it to the next stage of processing, which however might remove other tokens from the input stream because the unexpandable token might have arguments and might do expansion in order to find them.

@egreg The real use case is following. I am trying to patch up nath package accurately. Now it is not working with at least amsopn. The reason is in that amsopn defines some macros which, when following \mathop are expanded to either \limits or \nolimits (or \displaylimits). The thing is that nath's \mathop is trying to parse the next tokens.

So it does so by (simplifying) \def\mathop#1{something here... \let\next=}

@AndrewZabavnikov well that's fundamentally broken and not easily fixable. It is very hard to emulate TeX's primitives argument scanning using macros if you want the general case and full flexibility of the primitives rather than simple {} delimited arguments.

@egreg I meant 'left alone after expansion'.

@AndrewZabavnikov TeX doesn't do all the expansion first so there is no "after expansion" it expands a single token then starts looking at the first token in the replacement, if that is expandable it expands again until it has an unexpandable token which it then processes, but by then the input stream can have any number of half expanded macros

@DavidCarlisle Is it broken in it's approach to handling input?

@DavidCarlisle Well, my understanding was almost like that. It just a little bit harder for me to say what i think, i think.

@DavidCarlisle And - is breqn fundamentally broken?

@AndrewZabavnikov if you redefine \mathop to take a standard macro delimited argument then necessarily there will be cases where the behaviour will differ from the standard behaviour (whatever the definition is) TeX primitives just parse their arguments in a differemt way. The simplest example is perhaps superscript if you define \def\sp#1{^{#1}} then in simple case x^{2} and x\sp{2} seem the same but it is easy to construct cases where they are very different.

@AndrewZabavnikov well not really broken, but it is as documented fundamentally incompatible with everything else. Michael explicitly wasn't trying to emulate exact TeX primitive behaviour, he just documented the syntax that was supported.

@DavidCarlisle But it is after all compatible with amsmath, right?

@DavidCarlisle Right now i am taking approach where everything builtin redefined in nath is executed on entrance to "nath" environment.

If there were an opportunity to do the same for amsmath and have it supported after without me, i maybe would do even that :-)

@AndrewZabavnikov not really, no.

@DavidCarlisle Oh... But i've heard that it even was born at AMS (or was supported by it, don't remember).... What are incompatibilities?

@AndrewZabavnikov Yes Michael was responsible for both, but that doesn't mean they work at same time;-)

@DavidCarlisle BTW, what are the counter-examples for your redefined \sp?

To see what goes wrong if you define \mathop to take an argument consider

\def\hmm{\bgroup X} \def\har{YZ\egroup} $\mathop\hmm\har^\hmm\har$

If \mathop takes #1 its argument would be \hmm but that is not how it works, \mathop requires a brace group so it expands both hmm and \har to get one (and then ^ does the same). It would expand an arbitrary number of tokens ahead to get a balanced group. (well not just exand, it's constructing a math list, before @egreg corrects me:)

Oh... I see now... And there is i think no way to get this behavior?

From something user-defined?

@AndrewZabavnikov No. Macros don't look for braces that delimit their argument with expansion like \mathop: either they find one (explicit) or the first token is the first argument, and so on.

@AndrewZabavnikov You can get close but it will always break at the edges. A more robust alternative is to say: latex arguments should be {} delimited, if you do ^\hmm\har then you are in unsupported territory. That's one reason why the official latex syntax is restricted, so you can change the implementation without changing the syntax

@egreg Yeah. That is what i know of already. Just asking for tricks :-)

@AndrewZabavnikov I guess that something like \op[displaylimits,sub={i=1},sup=n]{max} would be easier to implement. And perhaps clearer than \mathop{max}\displaylimits_{i=1}^{n} ;-)

What i actually want to argue is that amsopn should not have redefined operators like \cos ... Or am i wrong?

@egreg or <munderover><mo>max</mo><Mrow><mi><mo>=</mo><mn>1</mn></mrow><mi>n</mi></munder‌​over>

@DavidCarlisle Yes, sure. :P

:-)))))

So, you don't have a common point of view here? ;-)

@AndrewZabavnikov egreg is a big fan of MathML, of course.

@DavidCarlisle @egreg Oh, i see. :-)

@DavidCarlisle And Equation Editor. :)

@DavidCarlisle Well, I don't actually see, since i don't know MathML (just what it is about), but i can make guesses. :-)

@DavidCarlisle What i actually want to argue is that amsopn should not have redefined operators like \cos ... Or am i wrong? (Just thought that you may not noticed that message).

@David: You are now part of the arara team.

@AndrewZabavnikov wrong/right, they wanted a document level switch to change the behaviour of math operators, and chose to make that apply to existing ones as well. that complicates some things and break packages that are not expecting that, but it isn't necessarily wrong

@PauloCereda where I will be as effective in getting the next release out as I am in L3

@DavidCarlisle Sounds good. :)

@DavidCarlisle xor

@JosephWright MathML3 2nd edition first.

@DavidCarlisle The bad thing is that there is no option to temporarily switch off amsmath in a document.

@JosephWright dandelion too. David is my tester. :)

And he does a pretty good job. He manages to break my code every time. :P

@AndrewZabavnikov tex doesn't work that way. You would have to have lists of old and new definitions and execute one or the other for each state. Last century when amsmath was released, latex2e+amsmath left if I recall correctly about 50 definitions left before the emtex hash table was full, so doubling the definitions for old and new style wouldn't really work.

@DavidCarlisle and working inside group? Or was that table global?

@DavidCarlisle of course, there are gdefs, i almost forgotten...

@AndrewZabavnikov well yes if you only wanted it locally and never wanted to go back within that group you could do that (but that would mean basically doing all the amsmath definitions for each such group, and again you may have run out of save stack (and it would add minutes to the processing time)

@DavidCarlisle Oh, okay.

@AndrewZabavnikov so much of the tex/latex design would be different if it were not designed for a machine circa 1985 :-)

Do you know of/what do you think of Lout?

@DavidCarlisle But it still would have \over, probably. ;-)

@AndrewZabavnikov I looked at it when it first came out (decades ago) it promised to be the next big thing and displace latex, but at the time it had far less functionality, It no doubt has more now, but it's very much a minority player.

@DavidCarlisle Yeah, and since it is, few people use it :-)

home time....

@egreg Yup

@DavidCarlisle One of the LaTeX3 ideas of course is to have 'code level' stuff separate from 'document level', which might make this doable

@PauloCereda One for you:

Sounds familiar somehow...

@StephanLehmke Oh my. :)

@StephanLehmke @PauloCereda Wasn't this discussed here a few days ago?

@PauloCereda Just point them to chat.stackexchange.com/transcript/message/13311179#13311179 :-)

@NicolaTalbot I knew it.

@Johannes_B @StephanLehmke @NicolaTalbot: My advisor has a cute name for it: theory of perversity of the universe :)

Direct them to @DavidCarlisle's comment:

Better advise to use file names like this:

Hello everyone!

@NicolaTalbot Done :-) tex.stackexchange.com/questions/155444/…

@StephanLehmke It's the psychic gravity caused by us discussing it yesterday that's caused the question to come into existence. :-)

@PauloCereda :-)

@Johannes_B :-)

I want to thank everyone with numerous answers that helped me to typeset that monster :)

Hats off to TeX-SX!!

@NicolaTalbot You know I'm just reading short stories by Philip K. Dick. They're full of notions like this :-)

@percusse I swear I read "Teleportation Systems".

@StephanLehmke :-) Have you read the one about the disembodied eyes? (Can't remember the title.)

Don't show it to @egreg he might find my choice of cover design a bit blasfemia

@StephanLehmke Well yes, that's a chapter in the thesis :P

@percusse Too late. ;-)

@percusse This guy. Is. Awesome.

@egreg I swear it's modern art :P nothing subliminal

@NicolaTalbot Not yet. I liked the one about the town which started to appear because the universe somehow fell into a new stable state about a communal vote in the past.

@percusse I think I've already seen something similar. Perhaps in Rome?

@StephanLehmke I haven't read that one yet. The wub fur one's good as well.

@egreg Might be a beta release. They didn't have Github back then.

I had this in mind to be honest emp.byui.edu/davisr/202/CreationOfAdamBrain.htm

didn't read it through but mentions the article I've read a while ago

@NicolaTalbot Yep thats great. Or the one about a bunch of paranoids who're fighting eternal war against an empty jungle after getting stranded with an automatic hospital ship :-)

So, gotta go, have a nice time everybody

@StephanLehmke Ubik's pay to open your front door/fridge always comes to mind whenever I hear about the kind of software you have to lease rather than buy so you can only read your document if you keep paying.

@Johannes_B Bye :-)

@NicolaTalbot Yep I think a lot of marketing guys are reading that stuff. Also the one about the useful robot which comes into your house to stay and advertise itself until you buy it.

@StephanLehmke It's called iPhone of your girlfriend these days eheh

@StephanLehmke LOL :-)

@NicolaTalbot: ^^ :P

@PauloCereda LOL :-)

@NicolaTalbot Let's see if @Joseph spots the MP reference. :)

@PauloCereda :-)

Can one use syntax that looks something like:

\begin{longtable}{r l l l l \multicolumn{1}{p{3.5in}}}

?

@FaheemMitha no (what would you want it to do?)

@DavidCarlisle Bummer.

Just saw John Cleese explaining stupid people:

I think the problem with people like this is that they are so stupid that they
have no idea of how stupid they are. You see, if you are very, very stupid,
how can you possibly realize that you are very, very stupid? You have to be
relatively intelligent to realize how stupid you are. There's a wonderful
bit of research by a guy called David Dunning at Cornell, who's a friend of
mine, I'm proud to say, who's pointed out that in order to know how good you are
at something requires exactly the same skills as it does to be good at that

Sorry for the bad transcript. :)

@FaheemMitha multcolumn doesn't mean anything until you have defined the columns?

@DavidCarlisle Have a col which is fixed length and wraps.

@FaheemMitha well that's a p column just use p{3.5cm}

@DavidCarlisle I was doing that, but it doesn't seem to wrap. I'll try a smaller length

@PauloCereda :-)

Ok, different question. I'm using datatool, and is there some way (in the following line)

{\nextnuml{\RowID} & \Date~({\bfseries \Filename\unskip}) &\From & \To & \Email & \Subject \\}%

I can make \Date and ~({\bfseries \Filename\unskip}) be on different lines?

Is there a way to force expansion & execution of the next token?

@AndrewZabavnikov That's what normally happens

@FaheemMitha You can nest tabular environments if necessary \begin{@{}c@{}}\Date\\(\textbf{\Filename\unskip})\end{tabular}

@NicolaTalbot That's fairly exotic, but I'll try it. Will it align correctly with the enclosing table?

@FaheemMitha If it doesn't it's user error:-)

@DavidCarlisle Ok.

@DavidCarlisle Yep. Bad question. In setting \let\next=\somemacro, where somemacro will eventually evaluate to \limits or \nolimits, I need to get \next set to that.

@FaheemMitha by the way Nicola didn't mean quite what she wrote (I'm an expert on typos): \begin{tabular}

@DavidCarlisle Right.

@FaheemMitha You might want to change the @{}c@{} to something else if you want different horizontal alignment. You might also want to specify the vertical position via the optional argument.

@AndrewZabavnikov depends what you mean by evaluate. If it will expand to \limits then you can use romannumeral to expand it. If it does arbitrary non expansion code then in general no, unless you know exactly what the code is

@NicolaTalbot Right. Trying to figure that out now.

@DavidCarlisle Oops. I was too engrossed in watching @Paulo's MP link.

@DavidCarlisle It (\somemacro definition) actually includes at least one \let in front of the rest. (according to trace)

@AndrewZabavnikov so you are doomed:-)

@DavidCarlisle Sorry, my English here fails me - that means a failure for me?

@AndrewZabavnikov sorry about that. Not necessarily failure but the code isn't expandable so basically there is no general solution you just need patch it so that where it decides to use limits or no limits it also defines your macro to record its choice

@DavidCarlisle Yeah, also there is a \after@all@limits@specifications@action :-)

The box in question centers on the line, which is not optimal. How do I get the first line of the box to line up with the first line in other columns? Otherwise, looks like a good idea.

@FaheemMitha nested tabular? use [t]

@DavidCarlisle So all my thoughts went to that in this situation i'm doomed :-)

@DavidCarlisle Actually I thought of testing with \ifx or something for \let and every other token that can lead to either void when evaluated or to limits specification.

I'm trying:

Does somebody know of list of that tokens?

{\nextnuml{\RowID} & \parbox[t]{1.5in} { \Date \\ ({\bfseries \Filename\unskip}) } &\From & \To & \Email & \Subject \\}%

which kind of works, except i don't know what [t] means, and the resulting column is too narrow. the alignment is correct though

BTW, how to do a multiline message in this chat? (for code, for example (or is it enough to just surround it with code quotes?))

@FaheemMitha Have a look at dickimaw-books.com/latex/novices/html/boxes.html the [t] argument is the principle same for \parbox, \begin{minipage} and \begin{tabular}

@NicolaTalbot Ok, thanks.

@AndrewZabavnikov If you copy and paste code into the chat box an extra button called "Fixed" (or something similar) appears. If you click on it, it will convert the contents to code formatting.

@JosephWright Look at the "write with argument replacement" question. :)

@NicolaTalbot Thanks! And is there a way to reply from keyboard to last message sent to you?

@NicolaTalbot Actually found the way to do it in one click. That'll do.

@egreg :-)

I was actually thinking of \tl_replace_all:Nnn but the regex method is nice :-)

@JosephWright I'm fond of it, as you know.

@AndrewZabavnikov list of all unexpandable tokens?

@DavidCarlisle And it's not the same as (almost) the list of all primitive commands?

@FaheemMitha t means top and the column is as wide as you specified (1.5in) (and teh unskip isn;t doing anything)

@AndrewZabavnikov no lots of primitive commands are expandable (\expandafter, \string, \noexpand, \ifx, ..) and lots of unexpandable tokens are not commands a, b, ...

@DavidCarlisle But isn't the list i want much more smaller?

@AndrewZabavnikov I have no idea, I can't work out what you want:-) (chat is fairly poor at discussing code, you are better working a complete example and asking a question on site where you can format code sections and comments much more easily)

> Actually I thought of testing with \ifx or something for \let and every other token that can lead to either void or to limits specification when evaluated.

@DavidCarlisle Why isn't that specific?

@AndrewZabavnikov yes I read that but I don't know what you mean (tex doesn't have anything called void or evaluation) I could guess, but so far the log of the conversation shows my guesses have been wrong.

@DavidCarlisle Ok, it's 2am in Moscow :-)

So, bye!

@AndrewZabavnikov good night:-)

@DavidCarlisle Ok.

Leslie Lamport interview:

"A macro-expansion language is good for a quick-and-dirty solution, so it was appropriate for TeX78. But it's not good for serious programming because you always have to fight to get thing expanded at the right time."

Before that he suggests that if he has paid more attention to TeX80 development, he might have been able to persuade Knuth to replace TeX's macro-expansion language with something better.

Wonder what that could have been.

@FaheemMitha lisp

@DavidCarlisle You think Lamport had Lisp in mind?

@FaheemMitha given how much lispy stuff is in latex, probably: There is still \@car and \@cdr and \@cons now..

@DavidCarlisle Maybe I should write and ask him. :-)

Could one actually reasonably implement TeX in lisp?

I kind of got the idea that this wacky macro expansion thing came about because of the technical requirements of a language that would integrate well with text and perform well on the computers of the day.

@FaheemMitha well you could, but I would guess that it would be more like luatex with the core written in web (or C or whatever) and lisp as an extension expression language. Exactly like another program of the same era: emacs which is written in C but has all user functions written in lisp

@DavidCarlisle So, one could write (La)Tex looking similar to how it does now, but it would be different internally?

@FaheemMitha well it's all random speculation but I guess not, If you actually replace the macro expansion system by lisp (or lua) you'd have a programming layer that operated on the document as data rather than a macro expansion system where the document is the program. lisp is actually rather good for that as program and data is rather more interchangeable than it is in other languages, but list isn't as popular now as it was in 60s/70s. So we don't see lisp-tex but lua/python/perl-tex fashion..

@DavidCarlisle Interesting. I guess Knuth was not a lisp fan. Do you think such a lisp TeX would have advantages over the real TeX?

I've actually been learning Common Lisp in the last couple of years. It is far and away the best designed language I've seen, though it seems to be fashionable to sneer at it.

For one reason or another.

It's also quite absurdly powerful, to the extent of making most mainstream programming languages look silly.

@FaheemMitha well it would probably have run 100 times slower at the time (similar to the NTS system which spent years re-implementing TeX in Java only to find that it was unusably slow. Knuth's code is somewhat eccentric but he knows more about optimising algorithms than most:-)

@DavidCarlisle I see. TeX does seem pretty efficient. It runs in like no time at all.

On modern computers, that is.

@FaheemMitha It's close to a (rough) lambda calculus approach.

@DavidCarlisle You can say that again. :)

@PauloCereda Lisp, you mean?

@FaheemMitha I can rember it taking ~15 minutes per page on early PCs (I had a sun workstation at the time so it was much faster for me, only 2 or 3 minutes per page:-)

I'm always impressed when a 30 page LaTex document compiles in like 2 seconds.

@FaheemMitha Yes. Of course, we are talking about computable functions, so it actually doesn't matter the language. :)

@DavidCarlisle Wow. Quite a difference. I remember using LaTeX in the mid-90s, but I don't remember much difference between then and now.

Of course, I use to write much shorter and simpler documents then. Wrote much more stuff on paper.

@FaheemMitha expectations change, if you ran your tikz-laden document on a machine from the 90's you would be very frustrated, and if you ran it on a IBM 286 PC with no hard disk and just two floppy drives which could fit tex on one drive your document and editor on a second and a previewer on a third that you had to swap over to view, you'd notice a difference:-)

@DavidCarlisle yes, TikZ isn't that fast. it is definitely a 21st century program

@DavidCarlisle Well, I'm off. Thanks for taking the time to tell me your thoughts. It's interesting to speculate.

@DavidCarlisle You know, it would be quite interesting to have Lisp as EL for TeX. :)

I'm planning to incorporate one to arara in the next major release.

Just helped my mom to bake a cheese cake! Yay!

@PauloCereda arara implemented in emacs lisp would be lovely.

@DavidCarlisle It's been a while since my last Lisp adventure. :)

First time here in the chat… I don't know if this is the correct place, but trying things in my profile I changed my picture (Identicon), is there a way to restore the original? Or try again and again until I find one that pleases me?

@Manuel sorry don't know. I just use my real face and it's too late to try to change that:-)

@Manuel Hello, welcome to the chat! To be honest, I thought the image profile would be either retrieved from Gravatar of generated randomly. Apparently the StackExchange people introduced this Identicon, which I know nothing. :(

@DavidCarlisle Photoshop is my hope. :)

@DavidCarlisle And according to TLC you should have two heads. :)

!!/eightball should @Manuel change his identicon?

I don't usually use my real face :D And the first time I've seen this random images was here. And today I was looking in my profile and touched something I shouldn't.

@DavidCarlisle Oh wait, let me start the bot. :)

@PauloCereda where's Psmith?

!!/help

@PauloCereda Psmith, the TeX bot: Good night! I'm Psmith, the friendly TeX bot - the p in my name is silent, as in pshrimp. I'm here as a companion to our fellow users in the typographic land. As you probably noticed, I always reply under Paulo's account, but do not despair, I say, my replies are always preceded by my own name. Enjoy your stay at TeX.sx! If you need any help, just ask our chat residents. Cheerio!

@DavidCarlisle I don't like this one nor the previous one. But I would like to get my personality back.

Done. :)

@DavidCarlisle Psmith, the TeX bot: The great 8-ball says: not a snowball's chance in hell.

@Manuel you could ask on meta, actually it's a network wide feature so best to ask on meta.stackoverflow where the stackexchange maintainers lurk.

@PauloCereda arara?

@FaheemMitha Yes. :)

@PauloCereda CTAN Update: lisp-on-tex?

@Speravir There we go. :P

Speaking of which:

!!/ctan

Psmith, the TeX bot, in fixed font mode: Let's take a look at the last CTAN news:

- CTAN update: LuaXML (Wed Jan 22 20:22:26 BRST 2014)
- CTAN update: odsfile (Wed Jan 22 20:07:19 BRST 2014)
- CTAN update: luamplib (Wed Jan 22 20:04:28 BRST 2014)
- CTAN update: seminar (Wed Jan 22 20:02:27 BRST 2014)
- ctan update: tikzposter (Wed Jan 22 20:01:28 BRST 2014)
- CTAN Update: tablefootnote (Wed Jan 22 16:42:58 BRST 2014)
- New on CTAN: biblatex-manuscripts-philology (Wed Jan 22 15:51:07 BRST 2014)

!!/cricket

Psmith, the TeX bot, in fixed font mode: Let's take a look at the last cricket results:

- National Bank of Pakistan 21 * v Habib Bank Limited
- Pakistan International Airlines 225/10  v State Bank of Pakistan 60/1 *
- Zarai Taraqiati Bank Limited v Pakistan Television 76/2 *
- Canada v Scotland 118/1 *
- Kenya v Netherlands 101/1 *
- Namibia 64/5 * v Papua New Guinea
- Hong Kong v United Arab Emirates 81/1 *
- Australia Women v England Women
- Pakistan Under-19s v Afghanistan Under-19s
- Griqualand West v Gauteng

Another Ashes?

@PauloCereda Too long ago (4th January).

@DavidCarlisle It seems that (may be) when I get a new adress I could change it. Gracias.

@Speravir Indeed. :(

@Manuel The gravatar icon depends on your used e-mail address. But you can click in your user profile with the mouse on the sqare where the icon is shown and include a picture only valid for SE.

@Speravir But I loved that randomness in the avatar. Instead of the usual need to choose one.

@Manuel Well, you have another random gravatar icon now … I had the same problem BTW once, when two profiles were merged (because of changing the login source). OH I see, you can change the symbol also in edit mode (sound logic).

Is this lisp-on-tex thing in TeX Live 2013?

@PauloCereda What a source do you have itm? This feed goes today back until 8th December: mail-archive.com/ctan-ann@dante.de/maillist.xml (well, maybe it would be toooo long for Psmith).

@Speravir But I'm still not happy. Yep, I (inconciously) changed it there. Well I hope I can fix it some day. Good night ;)

@FaheemMitha Yes, at least in my portable version for windows. :-)

@Speravir Thanks.

@PauloCereda Good! Psmith seems to be in good shape!

!!/battle

@egreg Psmith, the TeX bot: The current score is egreg 275 vs. 110 David. So far, egreg is winning.

@PauloCereda He is! ;-)

@Speravir Good question, let me check. :)

@egreg :)