« first day (802 days earlier)      last day (651 days later) » 
00:00 - 20:0020:00 - 00:00

8:03 PM
@kan The self evident truth doesn't need a lobbyist
 
kan
@DavidCarlisle Oh, that also. :)
 
I see @brunolefloch is posting some clever/insane stuff again :-) I wonder if he'll pop into the chat room at all?
2
 
8:17 PM
@JosephWright Let's try the usual approach here.
@BrunoLeFloch @BrunoLeFloch @BrunoLeFloch @BrunoLeFloch @BrunoLeFloch @BrunoLeFloch @BrunoLeFloch @BrunoLeFloch @BrunoLeFloch @BrunoLeFloch @BrunoLeFloch @BrunoLeFloch @BrunoLeFloch @BrunoLeFloch @BrunoLeFloch @BrunoLeFloch @BrunoLeFloch @BrunoLeFloch @BrunoLeFloch @BrunoLeFloch @BrunoLeFloch @BrunoLeFloch @BrunoLeFloch @BrunoLeFloch @BrunoLeFloch @BrunoLeFloch @BrunoLeFloch @BrunoLeFloch @BrunoLeFloch @BrunoLeFloch @BrunoLeFloch @BrunoLeFloch: Hello! :)
2
 
@PauloCereda but your weedy @ does not have the awesome power that @JosephWright's @ has for reaching dormant users.
 
@DavidCarlisle :-)
@DavidCarlisle I did use the @@ syntax there to be on the safe side
 
@DavidCarlisle Good idea! Let's ask @JosephWright to spam instead. :)
!!/eightball is Bruno asleep?
@PauloCereda Psmith, the TeX bot: The great 8-ball says: most likely.
 
when i refer to mathematical variables in text, i usually italicize them. is there some natural way to do this?
 
@FaheemMitha Math mode
 
8:22 PM
I was using emph just now.
 
@FaheemMitha $i$
 
@JosephWright I tried that, I got weird results.
@DavidCarlisle Ditto
 
@FaheemMitha For a particle of velocity~$v$ ...
 
@FaheemMitha That's a different font to the font used in math,
 
@DavidCarlisle Let me try again
 
8:23 PM
@FaheemMitha It's the thing to do so the weird results are not weird or you did something wrong:-
 
@JosephWright It's gonna collide! :)
 
@JosephWright I always liked, Let $p$ be an even prime/
 
@DavidCarlisle I was writing
$tempcoeff/log(e+step)$
 
@FaheemMitha No you should not use the math italic font for muti-letter identifiers
 
and I got two very spread out ff at the end of tempcoeff.
@DavidCarlisle Ok.
 
8:25 PM
$\tempcoeff/\log(e+\step)$
\DeclareMathOperator\tempcoef... and same for step
 
@DavidCarlisle Thanks. I'll try that. Apart from the tempcoeff the rest looked ok.
 
kan
@DavidCarlisle yeah, there are a lot of them you know! :P
 
@FaheemMitha No. it didn't:-)
 
@DavidCarlisle Don't follow this.
 
compare $log$ and $\log$
 
8:27 PM
@DavidCarlisle Oh I thought you were into something about proving Goldbach's conjecture. :(
 
@DavidCarlisle Ok, but \log is defined somewhere
Oh, I see. It is a magical ams construct
 
!!/texdef -t latex log
Psmith, the TeX bot, in fixed font mode: Here's the output from texdef:

\log:
macro:->\mathop {\operator@font log}\nolimits
 
@FaheemMitha Yes but yiou should use it not $log$ and \declaremathoperator (from amsmath package) lets you define your own similar commands
 
!!/texdef -t latex -p amsmath log
 
@DavidCarlisle Why not just use \text{} for that?
 
8:28 PM
Psmith, the TeX bot, in fixed font mode: Here's the output from texdef:

\log:
macro:->\qopname \relax o{log}
 
or as @Paulo just showed \mathop{\mathrm{step}}
 
kan
@FaheemMitha to avoid the spacing weirdos!
 
@DavidCarlisle <3
 
@kan Ok.
 
@FaheemMitha because it's slower and for operators doesn't give teh right spacing
 
8:29 PM
@DavidCarlisle Ok. I see. Thanks for the tip.
 
kan
@DavidCarlisle Slower in what sense?
 
compare $\text{log}x$ with $\log x$ same fonts but the second uses \mathop spacing
@kan slower in the sense that it takes more than 4 times longer to execute
 
@DavidCarlisle I doubt speed would be an issue.
 
kan
@DavidCarlisle OK, so, I'll have to do the tracing back (expanding?) that you guys are fond of? :)
 
@FaheemMitha youngsters. when I were a lad it took 15minute per page to process a document and being 4 times slower was an issue..
 
8:33 PM
@DavidCarlisle I'd go for the conceptual argument: 'log' is not text, it's a maths construct
I'm hardly worried about performance, after all ;-)
 
@kan \mathrm{foo} is basically a single assignment of \fam to a differnt integer so is essentially instantaneous \text{foo} (in amsmath) leaves math mode using 4 \hbox sets the text size in each to normalsize normalsize scriptsize and scriptsize (having to switch a possibly large number of text font settings for each size, then it typesets all four boxes, in a mathchoice and then picks the box depending on whether the current atom is in text mode or superscript etc.
 
kan
@DavidCarlisle wow!!!
Now, I have more questions! I'll do the googling...
And, of course ask when I get stuck. :)
 
Anyone else stress-testing @Brunolefloch's 'redundant package' code? I'm trying it on long document: had to switch to LuaTeX for the main run to avoid running out of space. Still analysing the first log after ~30 mins!
 
@JosephWright o.O
 
@PauloCereda Log file is ~80k lines, so it's not that surprising
39471  luatex       96.0  28:28.25 1/1  0    18   72    1210M  216K   1211M
 
8:45 PM
@JosephWright o.O
 
@DavidCarlisle My 6 year old machine takes a couple of seconds to process the 17 pg document I'm currently working on. TeX is quite fast on modern hardware. I remember it been quite fast in the mid 90s too, when I first started using it.
@kan so you went with a local installation of auctex?
 
kan
@FaheemMitha yes, built it from the source. Got stuck with a variable and David helped.
 
@kan I don't recall emacs having a package manager. Must be new.
Relatively speaking - I'm still on emacs 23.
 
kan
@FaheemMitha but still aptitude search returns p. Damn.
 
@FaheemMitha yes but even if it took microseconds rather than seconds, you still see the tracingall output scrolling past (either for real or imaginary) and weep for all those lost cpu cycles
 
8:51 PM
@DavidCarlisle If one was to weep for lost CPU cycles in this modern world, one would die of dehydration very quickly.
@kan p means what?
 
kan
@FaheemMitha oh, the whole exercise was to purge emacs 23 and get emacs 24.
 
@kan Don't follow. aptititude search for what?
@DavidCarlisle One of the numerous things I like about TeX/LaTeX is that it is very fast.
 
kan
@FaheemMitha aptitude search auctex
 
@kan And p means what?
 
@FaheemMitha as long as you don't write your math operators in TikZ
 
8:53 PM
@tohecz That would be masochism.
\DeclareMathOperator can only be used in preamble? Bummer. Any way around that?
 
@FaheemMitha what did you say? tex.stackexchange.com/…
 
@FaheemMitha I don't mind burning the cycles to do the right thing (you wouldn't believe the amount of work \bm does to get a bold symbol, but using \text{log}as opposed to \log takes farfar more execution steps and ends up ith a worse (and as Joseph said logically wrong) result with poor math spacing
 
@DavidCarlisle Good points.
 
@FaheemMitha \newcommand\atan{\operatorname{atan}}
 
@tohecz I guess people really like TikZ.
@tohecz Thanks.
 
8:57 PM
@FaheemMitha but you should have a good reason why not to place your definitions in teh preamble
 
kan
@FaheemMitha oh sorry, I had overlooked that question: p is a flag that aptitude raises for an improperly configured package.
 
@kan Ah. Ok, just delete it then.
You definitely don't want two copies.
I still think the binary debian package is better in general
 
kan
@FaheemMitha not sure what to do now.
 
@tohecz Well, just locality issues. I want to use it where I define it. Is \operatorname equivalent to \DeclareMathOperator?
@kan sorry, that is probably wrong
 
kan
I'll stick with both versions, the one I installed using emacs package manager and built from source.
 
9:00 PM
@FaheemMitha not equivalent. If you write \DeclareMathOperator{\atan}{atan}, then these two things are (moreorless) equivalent:
\atan
\operatorname{atan}
 
@tohecz I meant in usage
 
kan
The problem I believe is my inability to figure out how to require a package in .emacs file.
 
@FaheemMitha yeah, they both basically just put the contents in \mathop with a proper font
 
@tohecz Ok. I'll try it.
@kan You can do apt-get purge auctex
 
and ad "locality": The other way around is generally more advised: to have all the definitions at one place (in the preamble), seperated ffrom the contents. However, I understand that you prefer something different
 
9:03 PM
@kan I'm unclear what your problem is. If you have an Debian install of auctex still lurking, get rid of it if you are using a local install
 
kan
@FaheemMitha no I don't have the PPA auctex. PPA auctex will not come without emacs 23. So, I built it from source.
 
@kan I think p means absent, so you are ok.
what package do I need for \DeclareMathOperator?
 
kan
@FaheemMitha not sure, right now, I looked it up yesterday and already I had forgotten this.
!!/texdef -t latex \DeclareMathOperator
 
@FaheemMitha amsmath
 
Each search result is listed on a separate line. The first character of each line indicates the current state of the package: the
most common states are p, meaning that no trace of the package exists on the system, c, meaning that the package was deleted but
its configuration files remain on the system, i, meaning that the package is installed, and v, meaning that the package is
virtual. The second character indicates the stored action (if any; otherwise a blank space is displayed) to be performed on the
From the man page
@DavidCarlisle Thanks. Hmm. I have that installed. But I'm getting the error: \DeclareMathOperator\step ERROR: Undefined control sequence.
 
kan
9:11 PM
@DavidCarlisle Oh, OK.
 
@FaheemMitha you have \usepackage{amsmath} ?
 
@DavidCarlisle Yes. Maybe my usage is incorrect?
 
@FaheemMitha In the preamble \DeclareMathOperator{\step}{step} then in your math expression, \step
 
Right. I was using it incorrectly
 
@FaheemMitha texdoc amsmath :-) but actually I suspect you were using step as a variable name rather than an operator so \mathrm{step) is probably what you want
@FaheemMitha If you just want a one-off use without defining a command then it is $\operatorname{step} x$ which is spaced like $\log x$
 
9:18 PM
@DavidCarlisle Possibly
@DavidCarlisle Can I just use \mathrm{step)? What about spacing?
 
@FaheemMitha \mathop spacing is mainly for prefix functions like \log \sin which get an automatic thin space in \sin x \mathrm{step} would be a mathord and get no space compare \log\log and \mathrm{log}\mathrm{log}
 
\mathrm doesn't seem to do anything. I wanted it to stand out.
Like with italics.
@DavidCarlisle Yes, I see.
 
@FaheemMitha it selects roman upright instead of the default math italic
@FaheemMitha \mathit \mathbf \mathsf \textcolor{red} take your pick:-)
 
@DavidCarlisle Ok. there is no \DeclareMathVariable, apparently
Is the way a single letter behaves in math mode \mathit?
 
@FaheemMitha no \mathit is the text italic font in math mode (for multi-letter identifiers) like \mathrm, just use x
 
9:33 PM
@DavidCarlisle I meant, a single letter in math mode looks like it is italicized.
There is an impressive list of math mode font styles here - tex.stackexchange.com/questions/58098/…
Didn't realise there were so many
 
@FaheemMitha yes, that is the norm, what do you want?
 
Trying to steal another tick. ;-) By giving the correct answer (in a question).
 
@egreg not from me I hope
 
@DavidCarlisle oops.
 
@egreg lol
 
9:38 PM
@DavidCarlisle So, I was wondering if \mathit gives the same font for a multicharacter string. It looks like it does.
 
I need two more green ticks and 4 upvotes to get onto 200 with -100 bounty
 
@FaheemMitha Yes, it does (but it disregards spaces, of course)
 
one tick is on the way I hope
 
@egreg Right. Thanks.
 
@tohecz Giving green ticks is beyond my possibilities. ;-)
 
9:40 PM
@egreg but upvoting is not ;)
 
See tex.stackexchange.com/a/58124/3406 but texdoc symbols-a4 does not work for me. Maybe I need to install some doc package.
 
@FaheemMitha texdoc.net
 
@FaheemMitha \mathit uses the text font italic it is a different font than the mathitalic font used by default in math
 
@DavidCarlisle Oh? How do I get the latter, if possible?
Gosh, TeX is complicated.
 
@FaheemMitha mathitalic is just what you normally get in math, compare $difficult$ (math italic) to $\mathit{difficult}$ text italic in math, for multi-letter identifiers you want \mathit and you get ligatures and kerns as usual mathital has wider sidebearings and (almost) no ligatures so things are tyeset as a product of separate variables rather than a word
 
9:46 PM
@FaheemMitha \mathnormal, but as @David says, you should not need that.
@DavidCarlisle the word "almost" in your post makes me pry, there're ligatures there?
 
@DavidCarlisle So, to summarize, use \mathit for multi-letter identifiers?
@DavidCarlisle What is mathital?
 
@FaheemMitha yes (or \mathrm depending on personal preference)
@FaheemMitha typing error you are making me type a lot and im rubbish at it
 
@DavidCarlisle I'm sorry. Off to bed now so...
 
@FaheemMitha :-)
@tohecz added that at last minute as I wasn't sure, there are no normal ligatures but there may be some special ones (I know we experimented with encodings such that --> ligatured to \longrightarrow at one stage)
 
@DavidCarlisle oh! TBH, I would vote against, everyone knows what `\` is.
damn how do you input backslash in the fixedfont mode?!
 
9:54 PM
@tohecz easiest is to use a space ( I think it is possible to get just the backslash but \ is easier
 
@DavidCarlisle yeah I know, but that's boring :D
 
@DavidCarlisle Anyway, thanks again.
 
@JosephWright 3. doesn't work in chat: ``
 
@tohecz \ and there will be no space, I believe
 
9:57 PM
@egreg there is
 
Correction, there is a space.
 
@DavidCarlisle Ok, I finally understood this. mathital -> $difficult$ (math italic).
I think I'm just sleepy. Bye, guys.
 
@tohecz Who's minding it? :)
 
!!/answer how do I write single fixed-font backslash in SX chat?
@egreg me :)
 
@FaheemMitha The usual example is $different\ne\mathit{different}$. :)
 
@egreg Good example. :-)
 
@JosephWright x \ x
what?
x \ x
@JosephWright damn that's crazy, but thanks
 
@PeterGrill Hi Peter, how's the test going?
 
\documentclass[10pt]{article}
\usepackage{enumitem}
\usepackage{multicol}

\makeatletter
\def\enit@setresumekeys #1#2#3{%
  \enit@toks \expandafter {\enit@savekeys }%
  \xdef \enit@afterlist {#2\def \enit@noexcs {enit@resumekeys@#1}{\the\enit@toks }%
    \ifnum \enit@type =\z@ #3\gdef \enit@noexcs
    {enit@resume@#1}{\csname c@\@listctr \endcsname \the \csname c@\@listctr \endcsname }%
    \fi
  }%
}
\makeatother

\begin{document}

\begin{multicols}{2}
\begin{enumerate}
\item A
\item B
\item C
 
@tohecz It seems to work
 
10:13 PM
@egreg it does, it's a part of a comment in this answer:
4
A: How to resume list numbering (enumerated lists) with multicols environments

toheczYou need to modify the macro \enit@setresumekeys to do one declaration globally. Put this into your preamble after \usepackage{enumitem}: \makeatletter \def\enit@setresumekeys #1#2#3{% \enit@toks \expandafter {\enit@savekeys }% \xdef \enit@afterlist {#2\def \enit@noexcs {enit@resumekeys@#1}{...

damn, rep cap stopped me at 195 ... /needs green tick
 
@tohecz while you're there could you fix that colorbox copied from the MWE it has two word spaces from missing % at eol and two \noindent and a \par which are not doing anything in an \hbox :-)
@tohecz steal one from @egreg
 
@tohecz \enit@afterlist is executed after any \end{enumerate}, so it reflects the status of the counter of the last enumerate environment.
@tohecz I'm thinking too that Javier didn't think to the possibility.
 
@egreg I filed the report to him
@egreg what is the purpose of this comment? only to explain me why my answer works?
 
@DavidCarlisle It seems that my attempt was successful. :)
@tohecz I saw the code and tried it. I don't see any adverse effect in it.
 
@egreg oh which one? (you're still behind for the day and week though:-)
 
10:22 PM
@DavidCarlisle The table out of margin.
@tohecz However, one can avoid that using a "series"; the first enumerate is \begin{enumerate}[series=mc] (the string is arbitrary); the next one will be \begin{enumerate}[resume*=mc]
 
@tohecz It seems to work, but the correct way is still the series key.
 
@mafp Probably not easier to manage, but safer.
 
@egreg Still, I tested the version with \gdef and it seems to work even when nested enumerates are present. Therefore the solution is reasonable.
 
@egreg odd shouldnt my rep page show +15/-15 ?
 
@DavidCarlisle Only if the tick changes owner on a different day
 
10:26 PM
@DavidCarlisle I think no as long as it's in one day
 
@egreg odd rule:-)
@egreg so it got stolen before I noticed id got it so if you hadn't said I wouldnt have known
 
@tohecz If it works, it works ;-) But I left a comment to the question, so people might find that, too. (I'm shying away from posting an answer...)
 
@mafp if you post it, do so tomorrow please ;)
 
@DavidCarlisle Just 75 (because of the 50 point bounty); there are two days more.
 
@tohecz Junkies ;-)
 
10:29 PM
@mafp I wonder how much effort does it take to become Legendary
 
@egreg ah I noticed the siunitx cols were over-wide but didn't want to look up how to fix that so I don't begrudge you that tick for a better answer:-)
@tohecz a lot if @egreg steals all your ticks
 
@DavidCarlisle you made it on Sep 4, which means you had approx. 72000-250*30*4=42k rep
 
@DavidCarlisle I discovered the feature by trying 1.4e11
 
Stack Exchange is currently offline, we'll be back shortly!
Anyone with "vote-to-delete" right: @egreg @DavidCarlisle
-1
A: Avoiding blank page in Latex

user24255عَنْ جَرِيرِ بْنِ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ لَا يَرْحَمُ اللَّهُ مَنْ لَا يَرْحَمُ النَّاسَ صحيح البخاري كِتَاب التَّوْحِيدِ بَاب قَوْلِ اللَّهِ تَبَارَكَ وَتَعَالَى قُلْ ادْعُوا اللَّهَ أَوْ ادْعُوا الرَّحْمَنَ أَيًّا مَا تَدْعُوا فَلَهُ الْأَس...

 
@tohecz can you read it? Btw. thanks for DOI with link text answer (==> back to hacking bst file)
 
10:43 PM
@mafp no, but google translate can: "... Messenger of Allah upon him not God have mercy ..."
@mafp and you're welcome, that was a fun one :)
@mafp have you tried that code I posted here? It seems to work fluently, I already filed it as a bug-report/feature-request to the maintainer
 
@tohecz How fitting, he wants to avoid the blank page after the TOC (no mercy), and writes "Arabic" twice...
@tohecz Yes, tried it, and works.
 
@tohecz voted
 
@mafp maybe arabic is what made the human bot come there
@egreg thx. I promise that once I reach 20k, I'll use my rep to boost interesting questions
which is the package that provides \PDFLaTeX and similar commands?
 
@tohecz To become Legendary you have to work hard: the list is lockstep, Herbert, DavidCarlisle, GonzaloMedina, Werner, egreg, MartinScharrer (most recent awarded first); I earned it some weeks after Martin.
@tohecz metalogo
 
10:59 PM
@egreg thx
 
@egreg Well, it finally completed. The run time is several orders of magnitude larger?
 
@PeterGrill It shouldn't be, but of course with a large number of databases the pool operations are performed many times. Probably it would be the same if there were enough registers.
 
@tohecz @PeterGrill would you please vote here?
 
@egreg No I don't think so, there is something else going on there. The failure happens at around 16,000 instantiations in a minute or so, but with your patch it runs for hours... And yes it does complete...
@tohecz Where do you want me to vote?
 
here, to delete, it is obvously a spam: tex.stackexchange.com/questions/7582/…
 
11:05 PM
@PeterGrill Can you show a couple of calls, that I can replicate (no need to have 20000 databases, I guess).
@PeterGrill Oh, there is in the question. Let me try.
 
@egreg Its not too bad with a small number. Am experimenting further...
@tohecz Is it SPAM, or someone who does not know english?
 
@PeterGrill Try google translate
"Jarir bin Abdullah said, Messenger of Allah upon him not God have mercy of ruthless people Sahih Bukhari Book unification door saying the Almighty God Say claimed God or claiming Rahman whatever let Fella Beautiful Names"
I know it is not reliable, but this really doesn't look like IT-related
@PeterGrill as well, he's Unregistered
 
@tohecz Yep, I also wish people would actually remove the content -- have done so for now...
 
@PeterGrill I didn't think of it ... will remember for the next time
 
@egreg Just try the first 10000 -- takes about 10-15 seconds. But with the fix it takes muchhhhh longer..
 
11:16 PM
@PeterGrill Maybe there's some bottleneck in \unexpanded\expandafter.
 
@egreg Yep, I was going to try what I commented in Joseph's answer as that should be much faster, but don't know if there are downsides of that approach...
 
@egreg I'm just thinking about asking on the main site: What is \unexpanded\expandafter for
 
@PeterGrill That would work only if you have only a few names for your databases; if each one has a new name...
 
@egreg Yep, I would think that if a DB is being opened and closed that the name would be the same -- at least it is for me.
 
@PeterGrill Yes, it's significantly slower: for 1000 DB the times are 5 seconds (traditional) and 10 (pool); for 2000 it's 10 (traditional) and 30 (pool). :(
 
11:30 PM
@egreg Yep, definitely non-linear. Interesting problem, but expansion magic is still way beyond me...
 
11:42 PM
@PeterGrill which qn is this? (sounds fun:-)
 
My latest one:
9
Q: No room for a new \count with datatool

Peter GrillBackground: I am generating a document which tracks the progress on components of a project consisting of a large number of files. For each of these files, a tiny DB is generated and read via the datatool package. This DB contains a list of the related files and and where they were found, and ...

@DavidCarlisle Am really surprised that the expanafter magic in egreg's solution increases the run time soooo much..
 
@PeterGrill what's it using count registers for, they can usually be replaced by chardefs (l3 has (or had) a whole mechanism of fake count registers before etex made that (usually) unnecessary)
 
@DavidCarlisle datatool needs counts for traversing the database by rows and columns
 
@DavidCarlisle I still think that if the same DB name is used, the same counter could be reused and that would eliminate the problem.
 
@egreg well it needs integer arithmetic but does it actually need count registers?
 
11:49 PM
@DavidCarlisle One should look into datatool
 
the l3 fake count just held the integer in a mathchardef and to do arithemetic stick it in count@ do the sums and then mathchardef the answer back so you pay a bit of time but save the register allocation
 
@DavidCarlisle You theoretically never need them. You can always store the values in macros and use temp... for computations, can't you?
 
@tohecz well quite but if you are running out of registers it's time to consider turning theory into practice
count=6296
! No room for a new \count .
\et@xchk ...lse \errmessage {No room for a new #2}
 
00:00 - 20:0020:00 - 00:00

« first day (802 days earlier)      last day (651 days later) »