Open cao- opened 1 year ago
TeX in a Nutshell isn't good reference for "math issues" in TeX. It reads:
The math typesetting algorithms were implemented in TeX by its author with great care. All typographical traditions of math typesetting were taken into account. There are three chapters about math typesetting in his TeXbook. Moreover, there is the detailed appendix G containing the exact specification of generating math formulae. This topic is unfortunately out of the scope of this short text.
or:
... If it gets a \mathchardef
-ed control sequence, it prints a math object (it works
only in math mode, not documented here).
More than only a single paragraph should be added in order to describe the math settings using \matcode
, \mathchardef
, \Umathcode
, \Umathchardef
and friends. I'll think about it.
Thank you for the reply. I didn't know that math issues are intentionally not covered in "TeX in a Nutshell". Well, then there's no problem :)
I tried to add the sections about math codes, because I know that this wasn't documented in tex-nutshel nor in optex-math. Thank you for this tip. Done in my last commit https://github.com/olsak/tex-nutshell/commit/f3dbcd91eecb50a13fb2ab30b335dc68b2b96f05.
I use this document as a reference while reading the documentation of OpTeX, and I noticed that here the
\mathcode
primitive is not explained. Maybe it should appear somewhere, what do you think?