[luatex] a question about the names \Umathcharnumdef etc
jfbu at free.fr
Fri Oct 16 10:35:49 CEST 2015
Le 16 oct. 2015 à 09:47, Ulrike Fischer <luatex at nililand.de> a écrit :
> Am Thu, 15 Oct 2015 18:18:58 +0100 schrieb David Carlisle:
>>> or perhaps \Umathcharnumdef was always ok ?
>> yes, it was, the Umath... commands were always available with their
>> basic luatex names and also prefixed luatex.
> That's not true. In a texlive 2012
> l.36 \show\Umathcharnumdef
> l.37 \show\luatexUmathcharnumdef
> % etex and pdftex primitives are enabled without prefixing
> % as well as extented Unicode math primitives (see below)
but as your test file shows this was not the case for \Umathcharnumdef
(and also \Umathcodenum which I tested).
I recall now that mathastext prior to TeXLive 2013 did not use
\luatexUmathcharnumdef because the right side of the assignment would have
been \luatexUmathcodenum`\-\relax, but \luatexUmathcodenum back then
did not always return a Unicode mathcode.
> Are all these \Umath etc primitives using the same syntax in both
mathastext.sty fortunately does not deal with \Udelcode, \Udelcodenum
from David's answer, it uses (aliases to)
\Umathcharnumdef, \Umathcodenum, \Umathcode
and \Umathchardef with the same syntax for both engines.
I tested on TL2012 and TL2015 before pushing to CTAN yesterday.
Apart from that I am curious to get explanation as to your TL2012 result
which is strange (and the \luatexUmathcharnumdef does work)
More information about the luatex