Opened 12 years ago
Closed 12 years ago
#5610 closed enhancement (fixed)
[with patch, positive review] LaTeX customization
Reported by: | jhpalmieri | Owned by: | jhpalmieri |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | major | Milestone: | sage-3.4.2 |
Component: | documentation | Keywords: | |
Cc: | Merged in: | ||
Authors: | Reviewers: | ||
Report Upstream: | Work issues: | ||
Branch: | Commit: | ||
Dependencies: | Stopgaps: |
Description (last modified by )
This patch attempts to implement LaTeX customizations for the following things:
- matrix and vector delimiters (see #5474 -- this patch moves that code around)
- the use of plain bold vs. blackboard bold for ZZ, RR, etc.
It almost succeeds, except that I don't know how to get jsMath to display blackboard bold fonts, so it doesn't work completely in the notebook. (This is why the ticket is labeled as not being ready for review.)
Here's what it does: from the command line,
sage: latex_customize.use_blackboard_bold(True) sage: view(ZZ)
will pop up a PDF or DVI file with a blackboard bold ZZ. Similarly, in the notebook,
latex_customize.use_blackboard_bold(True)
followed by a cell containing
%latex $\ZZ$
will show a blackboard bold Z.
From either the command line or the notebook,
latex_customize.set_vector_delimiters("\\langle", "\\rangle") latex_customize.set_matrix_delimiters("\\{", "]")
will change the left and right vector and matrix delimiters as indicated.
There are also tons of changes in the second patch of the sort "\mathbf{Q}" --> "\QQ". The idea here is, first, to make the docstrings more readable, and second, to make it easy to change between \mathbf and \mathbb. Note that "\QQ" is defined (via #5555) as the output of the _latex_
method for QQ which this patch redefines to be "\Bold{QQ}", and setting use_blackboard_bold
controls the definition of the command "\Bold".
Now, if you want to typeset the reference manual, say, with blackboard bold instead of the default bold, the PDF version is relatively easy: just create the latex version (sage -docbuild reference latex
) and edit the preamble: change the definition of \Bold, and run latex. For the html version, you probably have to edit the definition of \Bold in sage/misc/latex_macros.py, or add \renewcommand{\Bold}... in the right place in sage/doc/conf.py; then run sage -b
, then build the docs. As you can see, I don't have very good ideas about how to change the reference manuals -- should there be a command-line switch to sage -docbuild
? -- so please chime in if you think of something.
See this thread on sage-devel for some more discussion, especially about mathbf vs. mathbb.
This ticket depends on #5359, #5433, and #5568 (all of which will be part of Sage 3.4.1.alpha0), and also on #5555.
Edit: this now depends on #5611 also.
Attachments (3)
Change History (21)
comment:1 follow-up: ↓ 2 Changed 12 years ago by
comment:2 in reply to: ↑ 1 ; follow-up: ↓ 6 Changed 12 years ago by
Replying to robertwb:
I think it looks good, but why "latex_customize" rather than just attaching methods to "latex"?
Well, when I tried to attach some methods to Latex, I got all sorts of weird doctesting errors for latex.py (all of the output for latex_variable_name acted as if EMBEDDED_MODE were True, for example). I have no idea why, but I fixed it by setting it up like this.
comment:3 Changed 12 years ago by
Strange.
comment:4 Changed 12 years ago by
- Description modified (diff)
- Summary changed from [with patch, not ready for review?] LaTeX customization to [with patch, needs review] LaTeX customization
I think I have the jsMath thing figured out: we need to install the blackboard bold font in the jsMath directory, so install the spkg at #5611 first. Then in the notebook try things like:
latex_customize.use_blackboard_bold(False) # the default setting view(ZZ)
versus
latex_customize.use_blackboard_bold(True) view(ZZ)
comment:5 Changed 12 years ago by
Here's a picture. The last part -- the docstring -- relies on #5653.
comment:6 in reply to: ↑ 2 Changed 12 years ago by
Replying to jhpalmieri:
Replying to robertwb:
I think it looks good, but why "latex_customize" rather than just attaching methods to "latex"?
Well, when I tried to attach some methods to Latex, I got all sorts of weird doctesting errors for latex.py (all of the output for latex_variable_name acted as if EMBEDDED_MODE were True, for example). I have no idea why, but I fixed it by setting it up like this.
Just to follow up, I think this is the same issue as discussed in this thread on sage-devel. I would be happy to attach methods to latex
if we can get this straightened out.
comment:7 Changed 12 years ago by
Here are new versions of the patches. There are two changes: they are rebased against 3.4.1.rc2, and I managed to fix the weird problem with doctests in latex. Therefore we now have commands like latex.set_matrix_delimiters
instead of latex_customize.set_matrix_delimiters
.
comment:8 Changed 12 years ago by
By the way, in addition the changes noted above, when I was changing all of instances of \mathbb{Z
} to \ZZ
, etc., I discovered that the docstrings in the file sage/rings/padics/tutorial.py
were garbled, or were using no-longer-defined macros: they had things like
\mathbb{Z}p = \lim_{\leftarrow n} \mathbb{Z}pn
in it. I believe that this is supposed to be (in the new notation)
\ZZ_p = \lim_{\leftarrow n} \ZZ/p^{n} \ZZ
and I fixed as many of these issues as I saw.
comment:9 follow-up: ↓ 10 Changed 12 years ago by
This is really cool. I might recommend making the names a bit shorter, e.g.
latex.blackboard_bold(...)
This is just to be more similar to the way proof works for setting global settings. Also,
latex.matrix_delimiters(...)
which would return them if no arguments are given.
comment:10 in reply to: ↑ 9 Changed 12 years ago by
Replying to robertwb:
This is really cool. I might recommend making the names a bit shorter, e.g.
That's a good idea. Here's a new version of the patch doing that.
comment:11 follow-up: ↓ 12 Changed 12 years ago by
- Summary changed from [with patch, needs review] LaTeX customization to [with patch, needs work] LaTeX customization
Second patch ("-part2") is mostly minor changes in docstrings, but fails on four files. I'd suspect this is due to some of the recent work on improving doctests. So comments below pertain to just applying the first patch and testing from there.
The new methods for setting matrix and vector delimiters are a very welcome addition, and the options for "bolding" rings provide a good example for future options like this. One should note that work still needs to be done to make this work for all rings, this patch appears to only demonstrate use for ZZ and GF (though I could have missed some).
The use of an instance of the Latex class, named "latex" had me confused for a while, since now latex.__call__
replaces the functionality of the old latex()
. Some commentary highlighting the latex
instance in the source (at some point - either now, or later) might save others the same confusion.
sage -docbuild pdf reference
seemed to choke on the doctest for the list_function
method in misc/latex.py
. I'm going to attach the generated TeX below, we'll see how it fares. I also have a screen shot of the output. Its pretty jumbled up, and in particular the \begin{array
} has a "b" that is some non-ASCII character, so I wonder if there is a missing backslash and the b is being escaped?
I'm ready to give this a positive review with a rebased part2 patch and if the latex problem on the reference manual goes away. Maybe the best thing to do is just excise the problematic doctest for now and bring it back in another patch.
EXAMPLES: \begin{Verbatim}[commandchars=@\[\]] @PYGaO[sage: ]@PYGbd[from] @PYGaV[sage.misc.latex] @PYGbd[import] list@_function @PYGaO[sage: ]list@_function(@lb[]@PYGaw[1],@PYGaw[2],@PYGaw[3]@rb[]) @PYGaa['\left@lb[]1, ] \end{Verbatim} \end{quote} 2, 3right{]}' \begin{quote} sage: latex({[}1,2,3{]}) \# indirect doctest left{[}1, 2, 3 \end{quote} \end{quote} \begin{description} \item[ight{]}] sage: latex({[}Matrix(ZZ,3,range(9)), Matrix(ZZ,3,range(9)){]}) \# indirect doctest left{[}left(egin\{array\}\{rrr\} 0 \& 1 \& 2 3 \& 4 \& 5 6 \& 7 \& 8 end\{array\} \item[ight),] \textbackslash{}left(egin\{array\}\{rrr\} 0 \& 1 \& 2 3 \& 4 \& 5 6 \& 7 \& 8 end\{array\} \end{description} ight) ight{]} \end{funcdesc}
Changed 12 years ago by
Screenshot of garbled list_function() documentation (yellow highlight on "indirect" is from my search function)
comment:12 in reply to: ↑ 11 ; follow-up: ↓ 13 Changed 12 years ago by
Replying to rbeezer:
The new methods for setting matrix and vector delimiters are a very welcome addition, and the options for "bolding" rings provide a good example for future options like this. One should note that work still needs to be done to make this work for all rings, this patch appears to only demonstrate use for ZZ and GF (though I could have missed some).
The second patch also changes QQ, RR, and CC. It leaves \mathbb{P
} and \mathbb{A
} unchanged. (The first patch includes only the core of the customization code, and the relevant files happened not to use QQ, RR, or CC.)
The use of an instance of the Latex class, named "latex" had me confused for a while, since now
latex.__call__
replaces the functionality of the oldlatex()
. Some commentary highlighting thelatex
instance in the source (at some point - either now, or later) might save others the same confusion.
Does this affect end-users, or just developers? I mean, does latex(blah)
behave the same as it used to? I hope so -- that was my intention. You're right, though, that the syntax from the development end is different, but that seemed like the nicest way to do the customization: as methods (which could be tab-completed) attached to latex. Do you have suggestions about what sorts of comments to add?
sage -docbuild pdf reference
seemed to choke on the doctest for thelist_function
method inmisc/latex.py
.
I think this is easy to fix: put an "r" in front of the triple quotes at the beginning of the docstring. It was there originally, and then I deleted it (I don't know why) in the new version.
I'll produce a new patch soon with the "r", and with part 2 rebased against 3.4.1.rc4.
comment:13 in reply to: ↑ 12 Changed 12 years ago by
Replying to jhpalmieri:
The second patch also changes QQ, RR, and CC. It leaves
\mathbb{P
} and\mathbb{A
} unchanged. (The first patch includes only the core of the customization code, and the relevant files happened not to use QQ, RR, or CC.)
OK, that explains the split. ;-)
Does this affect end-users, or just developers? I mean, does
latex(blah)
behave the same as it used to? I hope so -- that was my intention.
I didn't notice any change from a user's perspective. And maybe it was just the change that threw me. I saw def latex()
going away and it took me a while to figure out how the functionality came back. I just thought for others reading the code it might help to make the definition of the latex
instance more prominient with some source code comments. Right now, it just seems to be slipped in there, when it is fairly important since users will be accessing/changing its contents. I did like the way you made the change while preserving latex()
.
I'll produce a new patch soon with the "r", and with part 2 rebased against 3.4.1.rc4.
I'll keep an eye out for it so you don't have to rebase yet again.
comment:14 Changed 12 years ago by
- Summary changed from [with patch, needs work] LaTeX customization to [with patch, needs review] LaTeX customization
Here's are two new patches, same subdivision as before, rebased against 3.4.1.rc4. I also added a comment about latex()
, as rbeezer suggested: this is in the first patch, right before the line
latex = Latex()
in latex.py.
Changed 12 years ago by
apply this one second (this is the same as latex-customization-part2.2.patch)
comment:15 Changed 12 years ago by
- Summary changed from [with patch, needs review] LaTeX customization to [with patch, positive review] LaTeX customization
Latest patches work well: apply cleanly, builds and tests fine, including documentation. Looks ready to go. Great addition to the LaTeX-Sage interaction.
comment:16 Changed 12 years ago by
Arrrg, the second patch has one reject in matrix1.pyx:
patching file sage/matrix/matrix1.pyx Hunk #1 FAILED at 191. 1 out of 1 hunk FAILED -- saving rejects to file sage/matrix/matrix1.pyx.rej
I will try to fix it. This patch will likely break some other patches, so I am considering applying the untabify patch, too (in case it applies).
Cheers,
Michael
comment:17 Changed 12 years ago by
Ok, I took out the failing hunk and merged it manually. Since this patch will potentially cause merge issues elsewhere I will push out 3.4.2.alpha0 in the morning after merging some spkg fixes.
Cheers,
Michael
comment:18 Changed 12 years ago by
- Milestone changed from sage-4.0 to sage-3.4.2
- Resolution set to fixed
- Status changed from new to closed
Merged in Sage 3.4.2.alpha0.
Cheers,
Michael
I think it looks good, but why "latex_customize" rather than just attaching methods to "latex"?