[luatex] a question about the names \Umathcharnumdef etc
joseph.wright at morningstar2.co.uk
Fri Oct 16 10:45:18 CEST 2015
On 16/10/2015 09:35, jfbu wrote:
> 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
> The file
> says that
>> % 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).
In older versions of LuaTeX, the \U... primitives were part of the
"luatex" list so were enabled with the \luatex... prefix. Those
primitives now live in a dedicated "umath" list so cn be enabled
separately from the other LuaTeX-specific ones.
> 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.
This is the issue with supporting older versions of a developing engine!
I'd suggest you strongly consider saying that only newer releases are
supported. (The LaTeX team are considering much the same for
More information about the luatex