Proficiency with LaTeX

For the discussion of math. Duh.

Moderators: gmalivuk, Moderators General, Prelates

gmedina
Posts: 109
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2007 4:36 pm UTC
Location: Colombia

Re: Proficiency with LaTeX

Postby gmedina » Fri Oct 19, 2007 4:48 pm UTC

Edit
Last edited by gmedina on Thu Nov 15, 2007 8:58 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
In Memoriam

miles01110
Posts: 611
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 3:39 pm UTC

Re:

Postby miles01110 » Sat Oct 20, 2007 12:09 am UTC

Amicitia wrote:I also have to ask: Is TeX actually used anywhere?


A couple of my professors have written/are writing textbooks in their respective fields using TeX/LaTeX. I imagine others do the same.

aguacate
Posts: 209
Joined: Fri Feb 16, 2007 10:29 pm UTC

Re: Proficiency with LaTeX

Postby aguacate » Sat Oct 20, 2007 10:28 pm UTC

Does anyone know how to apply a condition underneath a large union? For instance the union of B_{alpha} over a collection alpha.
Image

User avatar
crazyjimbo
Posts: 887
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 11:45 pm UTC
Location: Durham, England
Contact:

Re: Proficiency with LaTeX

Postby crazyjimbo » Sat Oct 20, 2007 11:28 pm UTC

aguacate wrote:Does anyone know how to apply a condition underneath a large union? For instance the union of B_{alpha} over a collection alpha.


Like this Image? If so then

Code: Select all

\bigcap_{\alpha \in A} B_\alpha

aguacate
Posts: 209
Joined: Fri Feb 16, 2007 10:29 pm UTC

Re: Proficiency with LaTeX

Postby aguacate » Sat Oct 20, 2007 11:59 pm UTC

crazyjimbo wrote:
aguacate wrote:Does anyone know how to apply a condition underneath a large union? For instance the union of B_{alpha} over a collection alpha.


Like this Image? If so then

Code: Select all

\bigcap_{\alpha \in A} B_\alpha



Thanks! It seems like it only works in the \[ math mode and not in the inline $ mode...
Image

User avatar
crazyjimbo
Posts: 887
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 11:45 pm UTC
Location: Durham, England
Contact:

Re: Proficiency with LaTeX

Postby crazyjimbo » Sun Oct 21, 2007 12:08 am UTC

aguacate wrote:Thanks! It seems like it only works in the \[ math mode and not in the inline $ mode...

Yea, inline subscripts get put to the side. I'm not sure if you can change this default behavior, but you could use \underset to force it to place something directly underneath the union.

Code: Select all

 $\underset{\alpha \in A}{\bigcup} B_\alpha$

miles01110
Posts: 611
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 3:39 pm UTC

Re: Proficiency with LaTeX

Postby miles01110 » Sun Oct 21, 2007 2:31 am UTC

Some commands can also be modified with the command "\displaystyle".

For example, with "\sum", a subscript with the normal "\sum_{i=0}^{\infty}" will give show the limits of the sum appearing to the right of the capital sigma. If you use "\displaystyle \sum_{i=0}^\infty" then the subscripts and superscripts appear below and above the sum.

If you preface "\frac{a}{b}" with \displaystyle, an inline or a nested fraction will appear fullsize instead of smaller.

The other one I use \displaystyle the most often with is \int. The difference between "\int" and "\displaystyle \int" is really profound in my opinion.

aguacate
Posts: 209
Joined: Fri Feb 16, 2007 10:29 pm UTC

Re: Proficiency with LaTeX

Postby aguacate » Sun Oct 21, 2007 4:37 am UTC

Has anyone found a nice way to title homework assignments? I kind of want to use \maketitle, just because it's there and it makes so much sense, but is there a way of toning it down a little so it fits more the style of "just another assignment"?
Image

User avatar
jestingrabbit
Factoids are just Datas that haven't grown up yet
Posts: 5967
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 9:50 pm UTC
Location: Sydney

Re: Proficiency with LaTeX

Postby jestingrabbit » Sun Oct 21, 2007 7:50 am UTC

aguacate wrote:Has anyone found a nice way to title homework assignments? I kind of want to use \maketitle, just because it's there and it makes so much sense, but is there a way of toning it down a little so it fits more the style of "just another assignment"?


Use the report document type?
ameretrifle wrote:Magic space feudalism is therefore a viable idea.

aguacate
Posts: 209
Joined: Fri Feb 16, 2007 10:29 pm UTC

Re: Proficiency with LaTeX

Postby aguacate » Sun Oct 21, 2007 5:47 pm UTC

jestingrabbit wrote:
aguacate wrote:Has anyone found a nice way to title homework assignments? I kind of want to use \maketitle, just because it's there and it makes so much sense, but is there a way of toning it down a little so it fits more the style of "just another assignment"?


Use the report document type?


Even worse - now a whole page is dedicated to the title.
Image

User avatar
xyzzy
Meta-Titled
Posts: 263
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2007 10:02 pm UTC
Location: Colossal Cave
Contact:

Re: Proficiency with LaTeX

Postby xyzzy » Fri Oct 26, 2007 2:51 pm UTC

aguacate wrote:
jestingrabbit wrote:
aguacate wrote:Has anyone found a nice way to title homework assignments? I kind of want to use \maketitle, just because it's there and it makes so much sense, but is there a way of toning it down a little so it fits more the style of "just another assignment"?


Use the report document type?


Even worse - now a whole page is dedicated to the title.


I just use a \section*{title}, and avoid numbering subsections.

If you want a name and such under it, use a small italic font and center if necessary - works like a charm.
"Wile E. Coyote was a theoretical mathematician." - Leliel
"Modern life can be so boring without elements of the bizarre or the fantastical. Hence, we have steampunk." - Me

miles01110
Posts: 611
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 3:39 pm UTC

Re: Proficiency with LaTeX

Postby miles01110 » Fri Oct 26, 2007 4:33 pm UTC

You could also try using \small{ text } in the title, but I'm not sure it works and am too lazy to try it at the moment. Or if that's not small enough, \footnotesize{ text }, \scriptsize { text }, or \tiny{ text } might do it for you.

User avatar
Lamil_Lerran
Posts: 9
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2007 8:33 pm UTC

Re: Proficiency with LaTeX

Postby Lamil_Lerran » Tue Oct 30, 2007 8:48 pm UTC

Does anyone know how to underline things in LaTeX while in text mode? I can use the math mode command \underline, but that prevents internal line breaks and ends up giving me overfull lines unless I split things manually.

I've included an example of the suboptimal use of \underline in case that will help you understand what I'm asking:

Code: Select all

Thus the kernel of $f_3$ is $\{ 0\}$ and so $f_3$ is injective. Note that the only assumptions we needed to prove this were that \underline{$f_2$ and $f_4$ are injective (i.e. monic) and $f_1$ is surjective (i.e. epic)}.

User avatar
crazyjimbo
Posts: 887
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 11:45 pm UTC
Location: Durham, England
Contact:

Re: Proficiency with LaTeX

Postby crazyjimbo » Tue Oct 30, 2007 8:54 pm UTC

The package 'ulem' allows for nice underlining. It defines a \uline{underlined stuff} command.

Code: Select all

\usepackage{ulem}

\begin{document}

Thus the kernel of $f_3$ is $\{ 0\}$ and so $f_3$ is injective. Note that the only assumptions we needed to prove this were that \uline {$f_2$ and $f_4$ are injective (i.e. monic) and $f_1$ is surjective (i.e. epic)}.

\end{document}

User avatar
Lamil_Lerran
Posts: 9
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2007 8:33 pm UTC

Re: Proficiency with LaTeX

Postby Lamil_Lerran » Tue Oct 30, 2007 9:08 pm UTC

crazyjimbo wrote:The package 'ulem' allows for nice underlining. It defines a \uline{underlined stuff} command.


Works great. Thank you.

User avatar
Owehn
Posts: 479
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 12:49 pm UTC
Location: Cambridge, UK

Re: Proficiency with LaTeX

Postby Owehn » Tue Oct 30, 2007 11:48 pm UTC

Does anyone here know how I can put an arbitrary mathematical expression directly under another? For example, a subscript applied to \lim or \sum appears directly under the limit or summation sign (in display style), but a subscript applied to, say, \mathrm{Prob} does not.

I know there's a way to do this, but I can't remember how.
[This space intentionally left blank.]

mike-l
Posts: 2758
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2007 2:16 am UTC

Re: Proficiency with LaTeX

Postby mike-l » Wed Oct 31, 2007 3:00 am UTC

Owehn wrote:Does anyone here know how I can put an arbitrary mathematical expression directly under another?


I had posted suggesting \atop, but apparently this doesn't work in LaTeX 2e, you need to use \genfrac instead

Cheers,
Mike
addams wrote:This forum has some very well educated people typing away in loops with Sourmilk. He is a lucky Sourmilk.

The_Spectre
Posts: 33
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 2:18 pm UTC

Re: Proficiency with LaTeX

Postby The_Spectre » Wed Oct 31, 2007 10:23 am UTC

Owehn wrote:Does anyone here know how I can put an arbitrary mathematical expression directly under another? For example, a subscript applied to \lim or \sum appears directly under the limit or summation sign (in display style), but a subscript applied to, say, \mathrm{Prob} does not.

I know there's a way to do this, but I can't remember how.

Try \stackrel{\mathrm{Prob}}{raptors}.

miles01110
Posts: 611
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 3:39 pm UTC

Re: Proficiency with LaTeX

Postby miles01110 » Wed Oct 31, 2007 12:38 pm UTC

Owehn wrote:Does anyone here know how I can put an arbitrary mathematical expression directly under another? For example, a subscript applied to \lim or \sum appears directly under the limit or summation sign (in display style), but a subscript applied to, say, \mathrm{Prob} does not.

I know there's a way to do this, but I can't remember how.


Try something like

Code: Select all

\displaystyle \sum_{i=0}^\infty


\displaystyle Works for sums, limits, and integrals. It also makes in-line and nested fractions normal sized.

User avatar
Owehn
Posts: 479
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 12:49 pm UTC
Location: Cambridge, UK

Re: Proficiency with LaTeX

Postby Owehn » Wed Oct 31, 2007 4:33 pm UTC

None of those was exactly what I wanted, but googling \stackrel gave me \mathop, which works. For example, \mathop{\mathrm{Prob}}_{z\in Z} puts the subscript line directly beneath "Prob", and not after it.
[This space intentionally left blank.]

User avatar
Nimz
Posts: 580
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 9:49 am UTC
Location: the origin

Re: Proficiency with LaTeX

Postby Nimz » Thu Nov 01, 2007 1:41 am UTC

crazyjimbo wrote:
aguacate wrote:Does anyone know how to apply a condition underneath a large union? For instance the union of B_{alpha} over a collection alpha.


Like this Image? If so then

Code: Select all

\bigcap_{\alpha \in A} B_\alpha
This nearly derailed me while reading the thread. That's not a union, is it? Without looking it up, I think \bigcup is the the one that is U-shaped (U-shaped for Union, n-shaped for intersection is how I remember it).
LOWA

User avatar
crazyjimbo
Posts: 887
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 11:45 pm UTC
Location: Durham, England
Contact:

Re: Proficiency with LaTeX

Postby crazyjimbo » Thu Nov 01, 2007 8:51 am UTC

Nimz wrote:This nearly derailed me while reading the thread. That's not a union, is it? Without looking it up, I think \bigcup is the the one that is U-shaped (U-shaped for Union, n-shaped for intersection is how I remember it).


Oops, I wasn't paying much attention to the math, only the formatting.

So I got a letter wrong. Shoot me.

:)

User avatar
Nimz
Posts: 580
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 9:49 am UTC
Location: the origin

Re: Proficiency with LaTeX

Postby Nimz » Thu Nov 01, 2007 10:00 pm UTC

crazyjimbo wrote:Shoot me.

:)

It's all good, but if you insist. $$ \int h_0 \oplus s \cdot h_1 m $$
LOWA

User avatar
libellule
Posts: 504
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 7:39 pm UTC
Location: The Ivory Tower

Re: Proficiency with LaTeX

Postby libellule » Thu Nov 01, 2007 11:14 pm UTC

I love latex and have used it for years, as have most of my colleagues. It's the lingua franca of the scientific community. The project I work on is funded by NASA and there are many controlled documents all of us have to write as we go on. Most of us write them in latex. When it comes to getting them into the official document cycle.... we find out that we HAVE to have them in Word. There is no rationale for this, since nobody uses them but us, and we've been distributing these documents internally for years, but, when it comes to official NASA policy, they just have to be this way. So... we spend many many days translating them. We're all PhD scientists. Your tax dollars at work. To say nothing of a federal agency mandating the use of proprietary software in a monopolistic manner...

johnw188
Posts: 26
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 7:46 am UTC

Re: Proficiency with LaTeX

Postby johnw188 » Fri Nov 02, 2007 8:05 am UTC

A few years back I decided to learn latex. I was in a calc class, and our professor gave us this massive assignment (something like, analyze the behavior of these 30 infinite series using every test in the book). I sat down and did the whole thing in latex, and it was agonizingly slow at first, but that got me up to speed quickly. Now, I can type stuff up in latex about as fast as I can write it out, if I'm writing stuff out slowly and neatly. It's a good skill to have.

However, you have to know when it's appropriate. In depth lab reports and the like really benefit from the clean formatting and such. Doing up daily problem sets, however, makes you look like a pretentious douche with too much free time.

0SpinBoson
Posts: 92
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2007 5:28 pm UTC

Re: Proficiency with LaTeX

Postby 0SpinBoson » Fri Nov 02, 2007 9:04 am UTC

xyzzy wrote:
aguacate wrote:
jestingrabbit wrote:
aguacate wrote:Has anyone found a nice way to title homework assignments? I kind of want to use \maketitle, just because it's there and it makes so much sense, but is there a way of toning it down a little so it fits more the style of "just another assignment"?


Use the report document type?


Even worse - now a whole page is dedicated to the title.


I just use a \section*{title}, and avoid numbering subsections.

If you want a name and such under it, use a small italic font and center if necessary - works like a charm.


I recommend, for nice short things, the [article] type.
Also, if you like, you could get the RevTeX package from the American Physical Society, which has a number of nice templates.

In regards to whether anyone actually uses LaTeX, it's quite prevalent in the physics community. It saves having to format your article for where you're submitting it for publication. It's also quite nice for typing up homework solutions, once you've learned the appropriate symbols. Okay, it's not as fast as writing it straight out, but it has some benefits =)

User avatar
LoopQuantumGravity
Posts: 416
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 4:19 am UTC

Re: Proficiency with LaTeX

Postby LoopQuantumGravity » Fri Nov 02, 2007 12:01 pm UTC

libellule wrote:I love latex and have used it for years, as have most of my colleagues. It's the lingua franca of the scientific community. The project I work on is funded by NASA and there are many controlled documents all of us have to write as we go on. Most of us write them in latex. When it comes to getting them into the official document cycle.... we find out that we HAVE to have them in Word. There is no rationale for this, since nobody uses them but us, and we've been distributing these documents internally for years, but, when it comes to official NASA policy, they just have to be this way. So... we spend many many days translating them. We're all PhD scientists. Your tax dollars at work. To say nothing of a federal agency mandating the use of proprietary software in a monopolistic manner...


They do that because things need to be uniform, so if someone else needs to look at a document, they don't have to wait for tech people to come and install the right programs and set things up for them (they can't do it themselves, because people are stupid and will download files named virus.exe and run them). And they use proprietary software because that comes with tech support, and if there are bugs or something, they don't have to wait for the "open source community" to take forever to fix, bitch about whose fault it is, come up with fixes that cause other problems, since there's no quality control like companies have, etc...

Also, lots of experimentalists use word for writing papers because you can make figures in them look nicer, and have more direct control over formatting stuff.

And isn't is pretty easy to go from latex to word? I thought there were programs that did that. At any rate, what's wrong with making them pdfs? That should be an acceptable standard format?
I study theoretical physics & strings, and am a recipient of the prestigious Jayne Cobb Hero of Canton award.

And the science gets done and you make a neat gun
For the people who are still alive!

miles01110
Posts: 611
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 3:39 pm UTC

Re: Proficiency with LaTeX

Postby miles01110 » Fri Nov 02, 2007 12:10 pm UTC

LoopQuantumGravity wrote:Also, lots of experimentalists use word for writing papers because you can make figures in them look nicer, and have more direct control over formatting stuff.


I don't think it looks better. In fact, I would argue that equations in MS equation editor look a lot worse, even though to the layperson there isn't that much difference.

User avatar
libellule
Posts: 504
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 7:39 pm UTC
Location: The Ivory Tower

Re: Proficiency with LaTeX

Postby libellule » Fri Nov 02, 2007 7:11 pm UTC

LoopQuantumGravity wrote:They do that because things need to be uniform, so if someone else needs to look at a document, they don't have to wait for tech people to come and install the right programs and set things up for them (they can't do it themselves, because people are stupid and will download files named virus.exe and run them). And they use proprietary software because that comes with tech support, and if there are bugs or something, they don't have to wait for the "open source community" to take forever to fix, bitch about whose fault it is, come up with fixes that cause other problems, since there's no quality control like companies have, etc...

We never posted the .tex files, we always made .ps and .pdf's with dvips and ps2pdf. So there was no problem with access to the files. And remember, these were for INTERNAL use. By others who also use latex.

Also, lots of experimentalists use word for writing papers because you can make figures in them look nicer, and have more direct control over formatting stuff.

It's not so difficult now that there is openoffice and the like, but most of us have used linux or its predecessors since time immemorial and the idea of using word is anathema.


And isn't is pretty easy to go from latex to word? I thought there were programs that did that. At any rate, what's wrong with making them pdfs? That should be an acceptable standard format?

It should, but it isn't. That's why this is such a dumb ass-requirement. NASA = The National Administration for the Stupid Administrators.

rflrob
Posts: 235
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 6:45 pm UTC
Location: Berkeley, CA, USA, Terra, Sol
Contact:

Re: Proficiency with LaTeX

Postby rflrob » Mon Nov 05, 2007 3:14 am UTC

skeptical scientist wrote:Also, speaking as a grader, your grader will love you if you type everything up using latex.


And speaking as someone who transitioned to LaTeX midsemester, you might get better grades too... Although granted my handwritten problem sets were fairly cryptic.

On a mostly unrelated notes, does anyone know a good way to do Chicago footnote style citations? I'm writing a politics paper and they require that...
Ten is approximately infinity (It's very large)
Ten is approximately zero (It's very small)

gmedina
Posts: 109
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2007 4:36 pm UTC
Location: Colombia

Re: Proficiency with LaTeX

Postby gmedina » Mon Nov 05, 2007 3:37 am UTC

Edit
Last edited by gmedina on Thu Nov 15, 2007 8:57 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
In Memoriam

aguacate
Posts: 209
Joined: Fri Feb 16, 2007 10:29 pm UTC

Re: Proficiency with LaTeX

Postby aguacate » Tue Nov 13, 2007 12:24 am UTC

How do you write out a multi-part function?
Image

User avatar
Kawa
Posts: 714
Joined: Wed May 02, 2007 12:24 pm UTC
Location: Melbourne, FL/New York City/xkcdia
Contact:

Re: Proficiency with LaTeX

Postby Kawa » Tue Nov 13, 2007 3:10 am UTC

I'm using LaTeX for my Discrete Math homework, because my professor wants things word processed and laughs at you chuckles to himself if you use Equation Editor. It's caught on pretty quickly, though I have to admit I look things up quite a lot (then again I've only been using it intermittently for the past few months). I do use it for Physics 1 equation sheets though, which is quite glorious.

I seriously need to start making my own macros though - I'm using amsmath's /mathbb a lot, and to be able to instead put (for example) /real instead of /mathbb{R} would be pretty spiffy, not gonna lie. I should do that right now. Emphasis on should...
Kawa likes these things:
Spanish Ninja Bodyguard
math, anime, more!
Origami, Florida
New York, and xkcd.

miles01110
Posts: 611
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 3:39 pm UTC

Re: Proficiency with LaTeX

Postby miles01110 » Tue Nov 13, 2007 5:38 am UTC

aguacate wrote:How do you write out a multi-part function?


Do you mean a piecewise function?

Code: Select all

f(x) = \left\{
\begin{array}{c l}
  1 & x\mbox{ rational} \\
  0 & x\mbox{ irrational}
\end{array}
\right.


Obviously you have to put it in a math or $$ environment for it to work.

mike-l
Posts: 2758
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2007 2:16 am UTC

Re: Proficiency with LaTeX

Postby mike-l » Wed Nov 14, 2007 4:13 am UTC

miles01110 wrote:
aguacate wrote:How do you write out a multi-part function?


Do you mean a piecewise function?

Code: Select all

f(x) = \left\{
\begin{array}{c l}
  1 & x\mbox{ rational} \\
  0 & x\mbox{ irrational}
\end{array}
\right.


Also you can use the cases environment.

Code: Select all

f(x) =
\begin{cases}
  1 & x \text{ rational} \\
  0 & x \text{ irrational}
\end{cases}


Internally it's probably translated to the same thing, but you avoid having to type the \left{ and the \right. (the latter of which I often forget causing annoying errors.)


Obviously you have to put it in a math or $$ environment for it to work.

I've been told that $$ is bad style, and that you should use \[, \] instead. I know this does make unmatched $$ errors easier to find, though $$ is certainly faster to type. YMMV.

Cheers,
Mike
addams wrote:This forum has some very well educated people typing away in loops with Sourmilk. He is a lucky Sourmilk.

User avatar
crazyjimbo
Posts: 887
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 11:45 pm UTC
Location: Durham, England
Contact:

Re: Proficiency with LaTeX

Postby crazyjimbo » Wed Nov 14, 2007 6:21 pm UTC

Dear clever LaTeX people,

How do I make nice looking upper and lower integral symbols? I am trying to type up some stuff about the Riemann integral, and I am representing the upper and lower integrals as the regular integral symbol with a bar above and below it respectively. The same notation is used in Rudin's Principles of Mathematical Analysis if anyone has it to hand.

\bar{\int}, while not ideal, works ok for the upper integral, but \underbar{\int} doesn't format at all nicely for the lower integral.

Thank you! :)

miles01110
Posts: 611
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 3:39 pm UTC

Re: Proficiency with LaTeX

Postby miles01110 » Thu Nov 15, 2007 12:19 am UTC

\underline{\int} ?

For the upper one you could use \overline{\int}

Also, \displaystyle \int looks a lot better than just \int.

xprisoner
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2007 4:20 am UTC

Re: Proficiency with LaTeX

Postby xprisoner » Thu Nov 15, 2007 2:24 am UTC

I'm usually pretty good at finding Latex help when I need it, but can't seem to find what I need tonight. I'm writing up solutions for a practice exam for my calc class and would like to insert a little L'H directly above the equal sign between two limits. Any quick suggestions?

Thanks.

Nevermind. Figured it out.

\overset{L'H}{=} does the trick

User avatar
crazyjimbo
Posts: 887
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2007 11:45 pm UTC
Location: Durham, England
Contact:

Re: Proficiency with LaTeX

Postby crazyjimbo » Thu Nov 15, 2007 8:54 am UTC

miles01110 wrote:\underline{\int} ?

For the upper one you could use \overline{\int}

Also, \displaystyle \int looks a lot better than just \int.


The trouble with \underline and \overline is that the line spreads across the whole integral and any subscripts don't then look right. Thanks though.

Earendil
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2007 4:09 pm UTC

Re: Proficiency with LaTeX

Postby Earendil » Thu Nov 15, 2007 4:16 pm UTC

Okay, so I'm a freshman college student and I just started using LaTeX this year to take notes in my math classes. (I'm an official notetaker so I have to type them.) The thing is, I'm dangerously close to heresy; I've found that the equation editor in Word 2007 has every function I could possibly need for this class (vector calc and linear algebra,) codeable using many of the same commands as in LaTeX or analogous ones, and accessible using alt+=. The one thing is that Word compiles each command as you type, so that you can (a) see what your notes look like, (b) edit them or correct mistakes in the final-view mode, and (c) it's a lot faster than typing in LaTeX, then compiling, then making mistakes. It's not as pretty as the TeX typesetting, but it's significantly faster, which is obviously important for notetaking. So what I'm wondering if you can help me out with, XKCD board, is whether \therexists a LaTeX implementation that compiles as you type (which would be difficult because it compiles to a different format than you type in) or whether it's okay to type math notes in Word and I don't have to feel bad about myself?


Return to “Mathematics”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests