I have several lemmas in which I specify constants $C_1$, $C_2$, and so forth for later reference. Naturally, this is annoying when I later insert a new constant definition in the middle. What I'd like is a macro that lets me assign labels to constants and handles the numbering for me. I'm thinking something along the lines of
%% Pseudocode
\begin{lemma}
\newconstant{important-bound}
We will show that $f(x) \le \ref{important-bound} g(x)$ for all $x$.
\end{lemma}
Is this possible?
Expanding on rcollyer's suggestions of using a counter:
%counter of current constant number:
\newcounter{constant}
%defines a new constant, but does not typeset anything:
\newcommand{\newconstant}[1]{\refstepcounter{constant}\label{#1}}
%typesets named constant:
\newcommand{\useconstant}[1]{C_{\ref{#1}}}
(This code was edited to allow labels longer than one character)
And here is a code snippet that seems to work:
I want to define two constants:\newconstant{A}\newconstant{B}$\useconstant{A}$ and
$\useconstant{B}$. Then I want to use $\useconstant{A}$ again.
What you're looking for is to create your own counter.
Expanding on Aniko's answer, I used
this layered macro so that it created a shorthand for the label,
\newcounter{constant}
\newcommand{\newconstant}[1]{\refstepcounter{constant}\label{#1}}
\newcommand{\useconstant}[1]{C_{\ref{#1}}}
\newcommand{\defconstant}[1]{ \newconstant{c_#1}\expandafter\newcommand\csname c#1\endcsname{\useconstant{c_#1}} } %
So to use this, you would then do
\defconstant{a}
\defconstant{b}
There exist constant $\ca$ and $\cb$ such that ....
careful not to overwrite existing commands (i'm sure it would warn you anyhow)
Related
I have a macro that is generating two rules to avoid circularity issues. For a call like yaspl_bootstrap_library(name=foo, deps=[":bar"]) I want to generate the following rules:
yaspl_library(name=foo, deps=[":bar"])
yaspl_srcs(name=foo_srcs, deps=[":bar_srcs"])
Thus I need a function to turn ":bar" into ":bar_srcs". And while the obvious string concatenation works in this example it fails in the case where "//lib/foo" needs to be turned into "//lib/foo:foo_srcs".
This seems like a common thing that would happen in macros yet I cannot seem to find anything that does it easily.
First, I'll point out that this kind of string manipulation will not work with the select function (https://docs.bazel.build/versions/master/be/functions.html#select).
If it's not an issue for you, you can go ahead. This function can be written in a .bzl file. I agree this label manipulation functions should become available. In the meantime, you can try this function:
def explicit_label(label):
if ":" in label or "//" not in label:
return label
return label + ":" + label[label.rfind("/")+1:]
explicit_label(dep) + "_srcs"
I'm typesetting in LaTeX, and I'd like to display a "variable" (in my case, a reference \ref{blah} to an item number in list) in roman rather than the default arabic. Is there an easy way to do this? Thanks for any pointers!
You can try \def\theenumi{\roman{enumi}} inside an enumerate environment -- this changes both labels and refs, but you'll have to then explicitly undo it (if you want to).
lowercase
\romannumeral 0\ref{blah}\relax
uppercase
\uppercase\expandafter{\romannumeral 0\ref{blah}}
What are the references to? Usually, you would redefine how that particular counter is displayed.
For example, to change how a section number is displayed, you could use the following command:
\renewcommand\thesection{\Roman{section}}
Now, each command that internally uses \thesection will print the section number as a roman numeral.
Similar commands work for chapter, figure etc.
\roman (lowercase r) yield lowercase roman numerals.
For lowercase: {\romannumeral \ref{blah}}
For uppercase: \uppercase\expandafter{\romannumeral \ref{blah}}
A good solution seems to me to declare
\renewcommand{\theenumi}{\roman{enumi}}
\renewcommand{\labelenumi}{(\theenumi)}
in the header and then cite by \eqref{blah} to get your (iii) for the third item. (Note that \eqref requires the amsmath package. Alternatively, write (\ref{blah}).)
I spent some time trying to write a 'helper' macro to test a parameter for a new value, else use the existing value -- default values exist for all parameter positions.
I wanted to be able to write:
\foo{left}{nil}{}{20pt}
so that the second parameter would used its current value but the third value would be the value empty string. I wanted to use the notation:
\edef\pA{\isnil{#1}{\pA){#1}} % one for each parameter
I defined \isnil like so:
\def\nil{nil}
\def\isnil#1#2#3{%
\edef\nilTest{#1}%
\ifx\nilTest\nil#2\else#3\fi
}
but when I tried to run it, TeX complained that \nilTest is an undefined control sequence.
That is true of course, but I want \pA to hold a value, not a recipe for a value, so it must be an \edef which means that all the macro test will be expanded but while will the \edef not protect the \nilTest -- is this a place to use \noexpand -- that did not seem to work for me.
EDIT: no digits in \cs names (yeah, I knew that.)
Why doesn't your solution work? \edef\pA{\isnil{#1}{\pA){#1}} expands \isnil and gets \edef\nilTest{.... Now \edef is not expandable and falls into a sequence of \pA as the first element. An attempt to expand the next macro \nilTest fails.
Use \setpar from the following code to change your parameter.
\def\nil{nil}
\def\setpar#1#2{%
\edef\nilTest{#2}%
\ifx\nilTest\nil\else\let#1\nilTest\fi}
\def\first{old first}
\def\second{old second}
\setpar \first{nil}
\setpar \second{new}
first = ``\first'', second = ``\second''
P.S. Do not use digits in your macro.
I'd like to express the following sentence (source_location is also italic, it's not correctly rendered):
Each entry has a list of tuple: < source_location, R/W, trip_counter, occurrence, killed (explained in the later) >
My current workaround for this is:
$ \left\langle
\textit{source\_location}, \textit{R/W}, \textit{trip\_counter},
\textit{occurrence}, \textit{killed} \text{(explained in the later)}
\right\rangle $
I'm using 2-column paper. This < .. > is too long, but no line break because it is a math. How do I automatically (or manually) put line break in such case? It seems that \left\langle and \right\rangle should be in a single math. So, hard to break into multiple maths.
$<$ and $>$ would be an alternative, but I don't like it.
LaTeX does allow inline maths to break over lines by default, but there are a number of restrictions. Specifically, in your case, using \left...\right puts everything inside a non-breakable math group, so the first step is to replace them with either just plain \langle...\rangle or perhaps \bigl\langle...\bigr\rangle.
However, this still isn't enough to permit linebreaking; usually that's still only allowed after relations or operators, not punctuation such as the comma. (I think this is what's going on anyway; I haven't stopped to look this up.) So you want indicate where allowable line breaks may occur by writing \linebreak[1] after each comma.
Depending how often you have to do this, it may be preferable to write a command to wrap your "tuples" into a nice command. In order to write this in your source:
$ \mytuple{ source\_location, R/W, trip\_counter, occurrence,
killed\upshape (explained in the later) } $
here's a definition of \mytuple that takes all of the above into account:
\makeatletter
\newcommand\mytuple[1]{%
\#tempcnta=0
\bigl\langle
\#for\#ii:=#1\do{%
\#insertbreakingcomma
\textit{\#ii}
}%
\bigr\rangle
}
\def\#insertbreakingcomma{%
\ifnum \#tempcnta = 0 \else\,,\ \linebreak[1] \fi
\advance\#tempcnta\#ne
}
\makeatother
Why not define a new command:
\newcommand{\tuple}[5]{$\langle$\textit{#1}, \textit{#2}, \textit{#3}, \textit{#4},
\textit{#5} (explained in the latter)$\rangle$}
Then use \tuple{sourcelocation}{R/W}{tripcounter}{occurrence}{killed}
There seems to be a package that addresses that problem, called breqn. You can try this and let us know (I haven't used that).
I'd use the align* environment from AMSmath. Furthermore you could just add "\" to break the lines? Should work in math environments, too. Alternatively you could separate the equations.
Use \linebreak inside the math expression wherever you want a new line even between 2 brackets. This will enforce the line to be broken.
vi treats dash - and space as word separators for commands such as dw and cw.
Is there a way to add underscore _ as well?
I quite often want to change part of a variable name containing underscores, such as changing src_branch to dest_branch. I end up counting characters and using s (like 3sdest), but it would be much easier to use cw (like cwdest).
Is there a way to add underscore _ as well?
:set iskeyword-=_
What is, and is not a member character to keywords depends on the language. For help on iskeyword use :help iskeyword.
In case you're using vim, you can change that by setting the iskeyword option (:he iskeyword). If that is not an option, you can always use ct_ instead of counting.
One other good option in such cases is to use camelcasemotion plugin.
It adds new motions ,b, ,e, and ,w, which work analogously with b, e, and w, except that they recognize CamelCase and snake_case words. With it you can use
c,edest
and this will replace "src_branch" with "dest_branch" if your cursor was on first character of "src_branch".
You could type cf_dest_ and save the counting part.
Edit: or as suggested: ct_ changes text until right before the underline character. (I'm using the f motion more, so it came more naturally to me)
Or you could redefine 'iskeyword' (:help iskeyword for details).
I was just looking at this myself and added this to my .vimrc:
set iskeyword=!-~,^*,^45,^124,^34,192-255,^_
My .vimrc had issues with ^| and ^", which was part of the default iskeyword for my setup, so I changed to their ascii values and it works fine. My main modification was to add "^_" to the end of the default setting to keep vim from seeing underscore as being part of a word.
To delete to the next underscore enter "df_"
To change to the next underscore enter "cf_"
NOTE: don't include the double quotes.