# [texhax] Footnotes: Numbering

Philip G. Ratcliffe philip.ratcliffe at fastwebnet.it
Sat Dec 23 14:57:21 CET 2006

> Has something like
>    \let\OldFN=\footnote
>    \renewcommand{\footnote}[1]{\unskip\OldFN{\hspace{2pt}#1}}
> been suggested already, where one may not have to change anything
> in the rest of the document; plus, when I decide later I like the
> out-of-the-box look of \footnote better after all, I can undo my
> change by commenting out one line.  [If that doesn't work as written,
> I assume I can debug it quickly.

Nope, and this is certainly one of the better ways of solving the problem so
far suggested, since it doesn't involve changes to the document body.

... but then neither does \usepackage{footmisc} ... or any other package of
this sort.

> I routinely reinvent little wheels
> (or flat tires) because it seems faster than looking up, possibly
> having to download, and figuring out a new package.  Or is there
> some fatal or "good LaTeX practice" flaw with this approach?]

The relative speed here clearly depends on your ability to write flawless
macros straight off or at any rate to debug them.  Those who can usually do
and far be it from me to give such experts advice on their approach.

My objection is aimed at the suggestion that everyone should go for the
do-it-yourself approach.  For one thing, it makes package writing a bit
pointless and, more importantly, many (the majority) of the posters to this
list clearly do not fall into the category of expert macro writers nor
indeed into that of would-be expert macro writers.

For many simple tasks, a simple package exists and can be found with a
minimum of effort (CTAN FAQ, package database etc.).

Nuff said, let's enjoy the holidays.

Cheers to all,  Phil