I try to layout an algorithm in pseudocode with TeX and the package "algorithmic". It gets a mess: no spaces between words, and no linebreaks. Can anyone help me out.
How do I get spacing and linebreaks into algorithmic comments?
Thanks!
Here's my TeX code:
\documentclass{llncs}
\usepackage{algorithmic}
\begin{document}
\begin{algorithmic}
\REQUIRE{ $ Some long text here. Unfortunately this text is a mess. Spaces and line breaks are missing and the text gets weird block layout when setting line breaks manually. $}
\FORALL{$i = 1 \ldots \mid L_{items}\mid $ }
\STATE { $ i miss spaces here, too $}
\ENDFOR
\end{algorithmic}
\end{document}
Well the first problem is that you have your text in dollar signs $ ... $ that means to typest it in math mode. So the spaceing would be way off. Try this
\REQUIRE{ Some long text here. Unfortunately this text is a mess. Spaces and line breaks are missing and the text gets weird block layout when setting line breaks manually. }
\FORALL{$i = 1 \ldots \mid L_{items}\mid $ }
\STATE { i miss spaces here, too But I can get math $x = x +1$ }
Related
I am working on some algorithm documenation for a project and trying to write out the equations in latex.
The one problem I am encountering and have not found a nice way (assuming there is one) is mixing text and equations in a single line.
Here is an example of what I am doing (and later how I am doing it).
I am defining the equation, and than what each variable means (left aligned text hence the &).
The latex code to generate this
\begin{equation}
A = 3B * 4C + 5D
\end{equation}
Where:
\begin{flalign*}
&A = Something \: cool\\
&B = Something \: cooler\\
&C = Something \: even \: cooler!!\\
\end{flalign*}
My questions are:
Is there a better way to do spaces in between words besides putting \: everywhere?
If I dont put the \: I get this below, all the words are combined?
Is this the most latex idiomatic way to acheive this? Am I missing something that could help me?
So I can get the output the way I want, I just want to make sure its "correct" before I get to deep.
You should never set whole words in math mode. Besides the obvious problem with spaces you noticed, this will also completely mess up the kerning between the letters.
Instead you can use the \text{...} macro from the amsmath package.
The amsmath package also provides the \intertext macro, which you could use to insert Where: while retaining alignment of the equal signs in the equations above and below:
\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\begin{document}
\begin{flalign}
A &= 3B \cdot 4C + 5D\\
\intertext{Where:}
A &= \text{Something cool}\notag\\
B &= \text{Something cooler}\notag\\
C &= \text{Something even cooler!!}\notag
\end{flalign}
\end{document}
I'm having issues turning this word equation into a LaTex equation. It's coming out looking dodgy, please help!
I added a screen shot of the equation I want, and what I end up getting when I copy and paste into LaTex:
WORD:
LATEX CODE:
\mathrm{=\ }\mathrm{C}_\mathrm{0}\mathrm{[1-}6(Dt)1/2aπ2-3Dta2] + 12(Dt)1/2an = 1∞exp(na(Dt)1/2)
and therefore nothing comes out and LaTex doesn't let me run it.
This is absolutely not a proper LaTeX equation code. I don't know what you know about LaTeX, but you cannot just copy and paste from Word or any software to you LaTex editor. Plus, you need to provide your full code for anyone being able to help you.
Anyway, running this MWE should work :
\documentclass[11pt, a4paper, twoside]{report}
% ===== PACKAGES DECLARATION =====
\usepackage{mathtools} % Replaces amsmaths + more features
\usepackage{amsfonts} % Maths fonts package
% ===== DOCUMENT BODY =====
\begin{document}
\begin{equation} % optional : use the "equation*" environment to remove equation number
% optional : use traditional math font by removing the \mathrm{} command
\mathrm{X = C_0 \left[ 1 - \frac{6(Dt)^{1/2}}{a \pi^2} - \frac{3Dt}{a^2}\right] + \frac{12(Dt)^{1/2}}{a} \sum_{n=1}^\infty \exp\left(\frac{na}{(Dt)^{1/2}} \right)}
% optional : remove auto-sized brackets by removing the \left and \right commands
\end{equation}
\end{document}
As written in the code, you may want to remove the equation number and the big auto-sized brackets (that are more readable in my opinion). Just remove the corresponding commands. Also, you should consider using the "normal" math font and not the roman one that is clearly different from the text and helps the reader to separate equations from inline small expressions you could insert in your document.
One first sketch:
\documentclass{article}
\begin{document}
\[
C_0\left[1-\frac{6(Dt)^{\frac{1}{2}}}{a\pi^2}-\frac{3Dt}{a^2}\right]+%
\frac{12(Dt)^{\frac{1}{2}}}{a}\sum^{\infty}_{n=1}%
\exp\left(\frac{na}{(Dt)^{\frac{1}{2}}}\right)
\]
\end{document}
No packages required. The output:
Than you can tune the math fonts and anything else.
Instead of making a macro for each letter, as in
\def\bA{\mathbf{A}}
...
\def\bZ{\mathbf{Z}}
Is there a way to loop over a character class (like capital letters) and generate macros for each? I'd also like to do the same for Greek letters (using bm instead of mathbf).
\def\mydefb#1{\expandafter\def\csname b#1\endcsname{\mathbf{#1}}}
\def\mydefallb#1{\ifx#1\mydefallb\else\mydefb#1\expandafter\mydefallb\fi}
\mydefallb ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ\mydefallb
New for Greek
\def\mydefgreek#1{\expandafter\def\csname b#1\endcsname{\text{\boldmath$\mathbf{\csname #1\endcsname}$}}}
\def\mydefallgreek#1{\ifx\mydefallgreek#1\else\mydefgreek{#1}%
\lowercase{\mydefgreek{#1}}\expandafter\mydefallgreek\fi}
\mydefallgreek {beta}{Gamma}{Delta}{epsilon}{etaex}{Theta}{Iota}{Lambda}{kappa}{mu}{nu}{Xi}{Pi}{rho}\mydefallgreek
$\bGamma\bDelta \bTheta \bLambda \bXi \bPi $
$\bbeta \bgamma\bdelta \bepsilon \betaex \btheta \biota \blambda \bkappa \bmu \bnu \bxi \bpi \brho$
Expanding on Andrew's answer, here is a solution without \expandafter:
\makeatletter
\#tempcnta=\#ne
\def\#nameedef#1{\expandafter\edef\csname #1\endcsname}
\loop\ifnum\#tempcnta<27
\#nameedef{b\#Alph\#tempcnta}{\noexpand\mathbb{\#Alph\#tempcnta}}
\advance\#tempcnta\#ne
\repeat
This will define \bA, \bB, and so on, to expand to \mathbb{A}, \mathbb{B}, and so on.
Wouldn't be better to define one command
\newcommand\bm[1]{\ensuremath{${\boldmath$#1$}}$}
and it can be used both in text mode and math mode.
Usage:
\[\bm{F(x)}=\int\bm\delta(x)\ dx]
\where \mb F is blah blah blah and \bm \delta is halb halb halb...
Result:
F(x)='inegral delta(x)'dx
Where F is blah blah blah and 'delta' is halb halb halb...
Outer dollars are there to leave math (roman) mode because \boldmath command has no effect in math mode. Inner ones switch back to math (bold). Additional braces (${\boldmath) ensures that \boldmath command will work only with #1
Another advantage of this code is testing new commands for existence of \bb and \bg. So you can't crash LaTeX makros easily.
I hope this is what you're looking for.
I would recommend doing:
\newcommand{\b}[1]{\mathbf{#1}}
as Crowley says, and similar for all the other alphabets. However, if you really want to do it using LaTeX code, here's one that seems to work:
\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\newcounter{char}
\setcounter{char}{1}
\loop\ifnum\value{char}<27
\edef\c{\Alph{char}}
\expandafter\expandafter\expandafter\expandafter\expandafter\expandafter\expandafter\def\expandafter\expandafter\expandafter\csname\expandafter\expandafter\expandafter b\expandafter\c\expandafter\endcsname\expandafter{\expandafter\mathbb\expandafter{\c}}
\addtocounter{char}{1}
\repeat
\begin{document}
\(\bZ\)
\end{document}
I lost count of how many 'expandafter's there are in that! To get lowercase letters, replace the Alph by alph.
Why does the following command not produce a horizontal rule filling the space until the end of the line?
Hello \rule[0.5em]{\fill}{1pt}
It is my understanding that this should print the text “Hello” followed by a horizontal rule that extends until the end of the line, analogously to the macro \hfill which is effectively equivalent to \hspace\fill. – But in effect, this command just produces the text “Hello”, no rule.
I am aware that the effect can be produced by \hrulefill but it can’t be used here because I want a raised rule and \hrulefill doesn’t work together with \raisebox and I want my rule to hang above the baseline (at best in the middle of the line).
I don't have a satisfying answer as to why the command you presented doesn't work, but I can offer an effective workaround. Put
% Raised Rule Command:
% Arg 1 (Optional) - How high to raise the rule
% Arg 2 - Thickness of the rule
\newcommand{\raisedrule}[2][0em]{\leaders\hbox{\rule[#1]{1pt}{#2}}\hfill}
into your document's preface, and then you can accomplish what you were hoping to with:
Hello \raisedrule[0.5em]{1pt}
The horizontal rule of 1pt height and raised by 1.5pt.
Hello \leaders\vrule height 2.5pt depth -1.5pt \hfill \null
There is a package called ulem which does this
% !TEX encoding = UTF-8 Unicode
% !TEX TS-program = xelatex
\documentclass{article}
\usepackage[normalem]{ulem}
\begin{document}
normal text \uline{\textit{underline text}\hfill}
\end{document}
which will produce
For your curiosity, the option normalem for package ulem prevents ulem to produce extra underline with \em or \emph.
You can do this with the command \hrulefill
see http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/LaTeX/Lengths#Fill_the_rest_of_the_line
% I did it!
%
\documentclass{article}
\usepackage[normalem]{ulem}
\begin{document}
\uline{Some text \hfill\phantom{.}}
\end{document}
I was surprised that the Latex code from a recent question didn't throw up any errors, and even more surprised on further investigation, that Crowley's explanation seems to be true. My intuition about the \begin{equation} ... \end{equation} code is clearly off, what's really going on?
Consider this, slightly adapted code:
\begin{equation}
1: e^{i\pi}+1=0
$$ 2: B\"ob $$
3: e=mc^2
\end{equation}
This seems to prove that Crowley's explanation of such code, namely that "What that code says to LaTeX is begin equation, end it, begin it again, typeset definition of tangens and end the equation" is right: lines 1&3 can only be typeset in maths mode, line 2 only in text mode.
Shouldn't Latex see that the \end{equation} is ending a display math that wasn't started by the \begin{equation}?
Maybe it is because of environments math and displaymath.
I just tried those codes
\[\alpha$$ - works properly
\begin{displaymath}\alpha$$ - error (\begin{displaymath} ended by \end{document}) *
\displaymath\alpha$$ - works properly
\displaymath\alpha\displaymath - error (Bad math environment delimiter)
\displaymath\alpha\enddisplaymath - works properly.
Symetric options produce same results, so I think there's in LaTeX command definition
\newcommand{\[}{\displaymath}
\newcommand{\]}{\enddisplaymath }
\newenvironment{displaymath}{\displaymath}{enddisplaymath}
and in TeX something like
"if(displaymath)
{$$ := \displaymath}
else
{$$ := \displaymath}"
Maybe I'm wrong, but this seems logical to me.
Note: That proves that I was wrong. Better words are It says: "Begin equation, switch to text mode, switch back to displaymath, typeset tangens definition and finally end the equation".