# [texhax] Isthis a bug in LaTex?

Robert Sherry rsherry8 at comcast.net
Thu Sep 18 11:34:33 CEST 2003

```    First, I want to thank the group for their responses. To answer your
questions,
I am using version 3.141592 of LaTeX from MikTeX. The MikTex version number
is 2.3. The version of YAP that I am using is 0.99i.

The reason I am using \newline instead of \par is that until I say your
e-mail
that was the only way that I knew of to start a new paragraph.

Robert Sherry

----- Original Message -----
From: "Robin Fairbairns" <Robin.Fairbairns at cl.cam.ac.uk>
To: "Benjamin Deutsch" <Benjamin.Deutsch at informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
Cc: <texhax at tug.org>
Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 10:14 AM
Subject: Re: [texhax] Isthis a bug in LaTex?

> > I *can* reproduce the output, using an old teTeX 1.0.7 installation (TeX
> > Version 3.14159 (Web2C 7.3.1), LaTeX2e <1999/12/01> patch level 1. This
> > is, unfortunately, the only installation available to me at this
moment).
>
> this is not the sort of thing that changes between versions of tex.
>
> the problem is the inevitable consequence of the grottiness of latex's
> raggedness code.  the \newline puts the same stretchability in as
> there is at the end of all the other lines of the paragraph because of
> the \flushleft.  quite why this means that the explicit break has the
> effect it does, i've not quite worked out.  however, explicit line
> breaks are never really a good idea, and in a ragged-y situation they
> ask for trouble, unpredictable though it may be.
>
> (the fact that you've used the flushleft environment as a command
> probably _doesn't_ confuse things any further, i think.  that is, i
> don't think the trivlist, that flushleft invokes, is interfering.
> whatever, using \raggedright instead doesn't make a difference.)
>
> the problem doesn't appear if you use \par to end the paragraph,
> instead of \newline.  why _was_ \newline used here, btw?
>
> _______________________________________________
> TeX FAQ: http://faq.tug.org/