Change standard tex output of multiplication in maxima












2















We try to change the way maxima translates multiplication when converting to tex.



By default maxima gives a space: ,



We changed this to our own latex macro that looks like a space, but in that way we conserve the sementical meaning which makes it easier to convert the latex back to maxima.



:lisp (setf (get 'mtimes 'texsym) '("\invisibletimes "));


However, we have one problem, and that is when we put simplification on. We use this for generating steps in the explanation of a solution. For example:



tex1(block([simp: false], 2*3));


Of course when multiplying numbers we can want an explicit multiplication (cdot).



So we would like it that if both arguments of the multiplication are numbers, that we then have a cdot when translating to tex.



Is that possible?










share|improve this question





























    2















    We try to change the way maxima translates multiplication when converting to tex.



    By default maxima gives a space: ,



    We changed this to our own latex macro that looks like a space, but in that way we conserve the sementical meaning which makes it easier to convert the latex back to maxima.



    :lisp (setf (get 'mtimes 'texsym) '("\invisibletimes "));


    However, we have one problem, and that is when we put simplification on. We use this for generating steps in the explanation of a solution. For example:



    tex1(block([simp: false], 2*3));


    Of course when multiplying numbers we can want an explicit multiplication (cdot).



    So we would like it that if both arguments of the multiplication are numbers, that we then have a cdot when translating to tex.



    Is that possible?










    share|improve this question



























      2












      2








      2








      We try to change the way maxima translates multiplication when converting to tex.



      By default maxima gives a space: ,



      We changed this to our own latex macro that looks like a space, but in that way we conserve the sementical meaning which makes it easier to convert the latex back to maxima.



      :lisp (setf (get 'mtimes 'texsym) '("\invisibletimes "));


      However, we have one problem, and that is when we put simplification on. We use this for generating steps in the explanation of a solution. For example:



      tex1(block([simp: false], 2*3));


      Of course when multiplying numbers we can want an explicit multiplication (cdot).



      So we would like it that if both arguments of the multiplication are numbers, that we then have a cdot when translating to tex.



      Is that possible?










      share|improve this question
















      We try to change the way maxima translates multiplication when converting to tex.



      By default maxima gives a space: ,



      We changed this to our own latex macro that looks like a space, but in that way we conserve the sementical meaning which makes it easier to convert the latex back to maxima.



      :lisp (setf (get 'mtimes 'texsym) '("\invisibletimes "));


      However, we have one problem, and that is when we put simplification on. We use this for generating steps in the explanation of a solution. For example:



      tex1(block([simp: false], 2*3));


      Of course when multiplying numbers we can want an explicit multiplication (cdot).



      So we would like it that if both arguments of the multiplication are numbers, that we then have a cdot when translating to tex.



      Is that possible?







      maxima






      share|improve this question















      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question








      edited Nov 23 '18 at 9:24







      Kasper

















      asked Nov 21 '18 at 15:29









      KasperKasper

      2,63232139




      2,63232139
























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          1














          Yes, if there is a function named by the TEX property, that function is called to process an expression. The function named by TEX takes 3 arguments, namely an expression with the same operator to which the TEX property is attached, stuff to the left, and stuff to the right, and the TEX function returns a list of strings which are the bits of TeX which should be output.



          You can say :lisp (trace tex-mtimes) to see how that works. You can see the functions attached to MTIMES or other operators by saying :lisp (symbol-plist 'mtimes) or in general :lisp (symbol-plist 'mfoo) for another MFOO operator.



          So if you replace TEX-MTIMES (by :lisp (setf (get 'mtimes 'tex) 'my-tex-mtimes)) by some other function, then you can control the output to a greater extent. Here is an outline of a suitable function for your purpose:



          (defun my-tex-mtimes (e l r)
          (if $simp
          (tex-nary e l r) ;; punt to default handler
          (tex-mtimes-special-case e l r)))


          You can make TEX-MTIMES-SPECIAL-CASE as complicated as you want. I assume that you can carry out the Lisp programming for that. The simplest thing to try, perhaps a point of departure for further efforts, is to just temporarily replace TEXSYM with cdot. Something like:



          (defun tex-mtimes-special-case (e l r)
          (let ((prev-texsym (get 'mtimes 'texsym)))
          (prog2 (setf (get 'mtimes 'texsym) (list "\cdot "))
          (tex-nary e l r)
          (setf (get 'mtimes 'texsym) prev-texsym))))





          share|improve this answer
























            Your Answer






            StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
            StackExchange.snippets.init();
            });
            });
            }, "code-snippets");

            StackExchange.ready(function() {
            var channelOptions = {
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "1"
            };
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
            createEditor();
            });
            }
            else {
            createEditor();
            }
            });

            function createEditor() {
            StackExchange.prepareEditor({
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
            convertImagesToLinks: true,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: 10,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader: {
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            },
            onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            });


            }
            });














            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53415368%2fchange-standard-tex-output-of-multiplication-in-maxima%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes








            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes









            1














            Yes, if there is a function named by the TEX property, that function is called to process an expression. The function named by TEX takes 3 arguments, namely an expression with the same operator to which the TEX property is attached, stuff to the left, and stuff to the right, and the TEX function returns a list of strings which are the bits of TeX which should be output.



            You can say :lisp (trace tex-mtimes) to see how that works. You can see the functions attached to MTIMES or other operators by saying :lisp (symbol-plist 'mtimes) or in general :lisp (symbol-plist 'mfoo) for another MFOO operator.



            So if you replace TEX-MTIMES (by :lisp (setf (get 'mtimes 'tex) 'my-tex-mtimes)) by some other function, then you can control the output to a greater extent. Here is an outline of a suitable function for your purpose:



            (defun my-tex-mtimes (e l r)
            (if $simp
            (tex-nary e l r) ;; punt to default handler
            (tex-mtimes-special-case e l r)))


            You can make TEX-MTIMES-SPECIAL-CASE as complicated as you want. I assume that you can carry out the Lisp programming for that. The simplest thing to try, perhaps a point of departure for further efforts, is to just temporarily replace TEXSYM with cdot. Something like:



            (defun tex-mtimes-special-case (e l r)
            (let ((prev-texsym (get 'mtimes 'texsym)))
            (prog2 (setf (get 'mtimes 'texsym) (list "\cdot "))
            (tex-nary e l r)
            (setf (get 'mtimes 'texsym) prev-texsym))))





            share|improve this answer




























              1














              Yes, if there is a function named by the TEX property, that function is called to process an expression. The function named by TEX takes 3 arguments, namely an expression with the same operator to which the TEX property is attached, stuff to the left, and stuff to the right, and the TEX function returns a list of strings which are the bits of TeX which should be output.



              You can say :lisp (trace tex-mtimes) to see how that works. You can see the functions attached to MTIMES or other operators by saying :lisp (symbol-plist 'mtimes) or in general :lisp (symbol-plist 'mfoo) for another MFOO operator.



              So if you replace TEX-MTIMES (by :lisp (setf (get 'mtimes 'tex) 'my-tex-mtimes)) by some other function, then you can control the output to a greater extent. Here is an outline of a suitable function for your purpose:



              (defun my-tex-mtimes (e l r)
              (if $simp
              (tex-nary e l r) ;; punt to default handler
              (tex-mtimes-special-case e l r)))


              You can make TEX-MTIMES-SPECIAL-CASE as complicated as you want. I assume that you can carry out the Lisp programming for that. The simplest thing to try, perhaps a point of departure for further efforts, is to just temporarily replace TEXSYM with cdot. Something like:



              (defun tex-mtimes-special-case (e l r)
              (let ((prev-texsym (get 'mtimes 'texsym)))
              (prog2 (setf (get 'mtimes 'texsym) (list "\cdot "))
              (tex-nary e l r)
              (setf (get 'mtimes 'texsym) prev-texsym))))





              share|improve this answer


























                1












                1








                1







                Yes, if there is a function named by the TEX property, that function is called to process an expression. The function named by TEX takes 3 arguments, namely an expression with the same operator to which the TEX property is attached, stuff to the left, and stuff to the right, and the TEX function returns a list of strings which are the bits of TeX which should be output.



                You can say :lisp (trace tex-mtimes) to see how that works. You can see the functions attached to MTIMES or other operators by saying :lisp (symbol-plist 'mtimes) or in general :lisp (symbol-plist 'mfoo) for another MFOO operator.



                So if you replace TEX-MTIMES (by :lisp (setf (get 'mtimes 'tex) 'my-tex-mtimes)) by some other function, then you can control the output to a greater extent. Here is an outline of a suitable function for your purpose:



                (defun my-tex-mtimes (e l r)
                (if $simp
                (tex-nary e l r) ;; punt to default handler
                (tex-mtimes-special-case e l r)))


                You can make TEX-MTIMES-SPECIAL-CASE as complicated as you want. I assume that you can carry out the Lisp programming for that. The simplest thing to try, perhaps a point of departure for further efforts, is to just temporarily replace TEXSYM with cdot. Something like:



                (defun tex-mtimes-special-case (e l r)
                (let ((prev-texsym (get 'mtimes 'texsym)))
                (prog2 (setf (get 'mtimes 'texsym) (list "\cdot "))
                (tex-nary e l r)
                (setf (get 'mtimes 'texsym) prev-texsym))))





                share|improve this answer













                Yes, if there is a function named by the TEX property, that function is called to process an expression. The function named by TEX takes 3 arguments, namely an expression with the same operator to which the TEX property is attached, stuff to the left, and stuff to the right, and the TEX function returns a list of strings which are the bits of TeX which should be output.



                You can say :lisp (trace tex-mtimes) to see how that works. You can see the functions attached to MTIMES or other operators by saying :lisp (symbol-plist 'mtimes) or in general :lisp (symbol-plist 'mfoo) for another MFOO operator.



                So if you replace TEX-MTIMES (by :lisp (setf (get 'mtimes 'tex) 'my-tex-mtimes)) by some other function, then you can control the output to a greater extent. Here is an outline of a suitable function for your purpose:



                (defun my-tex-mtimes (e l r)
                (if $simp
                (tex-nary e l r) ;; punt to default handler
                (tex-mtimes-special-case e l r)))


                You can make TEX-MTIMES-SPECIAL-CASE as complicated as you want. I assume that you can carry out the Lisp programming for that. The simplest thing to try, perhaps a point of departure for further efforts, is to just temporarily replace TEXSYM with cdot. Something like:



                (defun tex-mtimes-special-case (e l r)
                (let ((prev-texsym (get 'mtimes 'texsym)))
                (prog2 (setf (get 'mtimes 'texsym) (list "\cdot "))
                (tex-nary e l r)
                (setf (get 'mtimes 'texsym) prev-texsym))))






                share|improve this answer












                share|improve this answer



                share|improve this answer










                answered Nov 24 '18 at 17:45









                Robert DodierRobert Dodier

                11.4k11835




                11.4k11835
































                    draft saved

                    draft discarded




















































                    Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid



                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function () {
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53415368%2fchange-standard-tex-output-of-multiplication-in-maxima%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                    }
                    );

                    Post as a guest















                    Required, but never shown





















































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown

































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown







                    Popular posts from this blog

                    鏡平學校

                    ꓛꓣだゔៀៅຸ໢ທຮ໕໒ ,ໂ'໥໓າ໼ឨឲ៵៭ៈゎゔit''䖳𥁄卿' ☨₤₨こゎもょの;ꜹꟚꞖꞵꟅꞛေၦေɯ,ɨɡ𛃵𛁹ޝ޳ޠ޾,ޤޒޯ޾𫝒𫠁သ𛅤チョ'サノބޘދ𛁐ᶿᶇᶀᶋᶠ㨑㽹⻮ꧬ꧹؍۩وَؠ㇕㇃㇪ ㇦㇋㇋ṜẰᵡᴠ 軌ᵕ搜۳ٰޗޮ޷ސޯ𫖾𫅀ल, ꙭ꙰ꚅꙁꚊꞻꝔ꟠Ꝭㄤﺟޱސꧨꧼ꧴ꧯꧽ꧲ꧯ'⽹⽭⾁⿞⼳⽋២៩ញណើꩯꩤ꩸ꩮᶻᶺᶧᶂ𫳲𫪭𬸄𫵰𬖩𬫣𬊉ၲ𛅬㕦䬺𫝌𫝼,,𫟖𫞽ហៅ஫㆔ాఆఅꙒꚞꙍ,Ꙟ꙱エ ,ポテ,フࢰࢯ𫟠𫞶 𫝤𫟠ﺕﹱﻜﻣ𪵕𪭸𪻆𪾩𫔷ġ,ŧآꞪ꟥,ꞔꝻ♚☹⛵𛀌ꬷꭞȄƁƪƬșƦǙǗdžƝǯǧⱦⱰꓕꓢႋ神 ဴ၀க௭எ௫ឫោ ' េㇷㇴㇼ神ㇸㇲㇽㇴㇼㇻㇸ'ㇸㇿㇸㇹㇰㆣꓚꓤ₡₧ ㄨㄟ㄂ㄖㄎ໗ツڒذ₶।ऩछएोञयूटक़कयँृी,冬'𛅢𛅥ㇱㇵㇶ𥄥𦒽𠣧𠊓𧢖𥞘𩔋цѰㄠſtʯʭɿʆʗʍʩɷɛ,əʏダヵㄐㄘR{gỚṖḺờṠṫảḙḭᴮᵏᴘᵀᵷᵕᴜᴏᵾq﮲ﲿﴽﭙ軌ﰬﶚﶧ﫲Ҝжюїкӈㇴffצּ﬘﭅﬈軌'ffistfflſtffतभफɳɰʊɲʎ𛁱𛁖𛁮𛀉 𛂯𛀞నఋŀŲ 𫟲𫠖𫞺ຆຆ ໹້໕໗ๆทԊꧢꧠ꧰ꓱ⿝⼑ŎḬẃẖỐẅ ,ờỰỈỗﮊDžȩꭏꭎꬻ꭮ꬿꭖꭥꭅ㇭神 ⾈ꓵꓑ⺄㄄ㄪㄙㄅㄇstA۵䞽ॶ𫞑𫝄㇉㇇゜軌𩜛𩳠Jﻺ‚Üမ႕ႌႊၐၸဓၞၞၡ៸wyvtᶎᶪᶹစဎ꣡꣰꣢꣤ٗ؋لㇳㇾㇻㇱ㆐㆔,,㆟Ⱶヤマފ޼ޝަݿݞݠݷݐ',ݘ,ݪݙݵ𬝉𬜁𫝨𫞘くせぉて¼óû×ó£…𛅑הㄙくԗԀ5606神45,神796'𪤻𫞧ꓐ㄁ㄘɥɺꓵꓲ3''7034׉ⱦⱠˆ“𫝋ȍ,ꩲ軌꩷ꩶꩧꩫఞ۔فڱێظペサ神ナᴦᵑ47 9238їﻂ䐊䔉㠸﬎ffiﬣ,לּᴷᴦᵛᵽ,ᴨᵤ ᵸᵥᴗᵈꚏꚉꚟ⻆rtǟƴ𬎎

                    Why https connections are so slow when debugging (stepping over) in Java?