Open chbrown opened 8 years ago
Have you seen this issue in real life? The four packages in question are
amssymb
textcomp
mathptmx
(just for times)stmaryrd
(which is needed for semantic value brackets) amssymb
is recreated in lucimatx.sty
and should not be loaded when using the lucida fonts.
textcomp
is actually loaded by lucimatx.sty
itself.
I don't remember why mathptmx
is called.
We could dispense with stmaryrd
and just import the two glyphs for semantic value brackets.
I'm prepping CondoravdiLauer-Anankastics.tex
for production work, and they use \shortrightarrow
from stmaryrd
, so yeah. I haven't hit this before on anything else, though.
Looking at this more, stmaryrd
and lucimatx
conflict (or at least the setup in the \if@lucida
branch in sp.cls
), so order of import matters. You'll get different looking semantic brackets (among other things, I expect) in the final Lucida render depending on whether the user called \usepackage{stmaryrd}
or not. This is bad. Two options:
\RequirePackage{stmaryrd}
in sp.cls
before running the lucimatx
import and other Lucida setup. If we do this, our custom Lucida settings will win whatever conflicts might occur, and any subsequent \usepackage{stmaryrd}
calls in the author's TeX will (necessarily) be ignored.stmaryrd
to the list of forbidden imports, with an exception for uses like \usepackage[only,funnsymbol1]{stmaryrd}
that don't overwrite existing commands.
sp.cls
imports different packages based on what font option is supplied in the documentclass.The means an author can use commands from, for example,
stmaryrd
, without explicitly importing that package, but this breaks when moving to production and adding the lucida flag.It's an easy fix to explicitly \usepackage the previously implicitly required package in the article's preamble, but that seems sub-optimal.