# [XeTeX] Conflicts between AMS document classes and polyglossia

David M. Jones dmj at ams.org
Tue Dec 30 03:58:50 CET 2008

> From: Ross Moore <ross at ics.mq.edu.au>
> Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2008 10:39:12 +1100
> Reply-To: Unicode-based TeX for Mac OS X and other platforms <xetex at tug.org>

> Sure.
> It's not my job to rewrite other people's packages.

There's really no reason to apologize.  I didn't mean to imply that I
expected a production-quality patch from you, and I'm sure nobody else
did either.  And I've certainly seen much worse attempts to hack LaTeX
code.  In fact, I wouldn't have bothered responding if it weren't for
the clarification about the underlying source of the extra \protect.

As for the rest, you were actually very close to a fully robust and
idiomatic solution, so it seemed worthwhile to spend a couple of
minutes filling in the missing pieces, especially since the fragment
of code at issue is quite self-contained and (other than the \@nx
alias) there's nothing in it that you won't find in the LaTeX 2e
kernel, so the relevant techniques are very general.  Even very
experienced LaTeX programmers get tangled up with token expansion
issues on occasion, so it's always worth highlighting some of the
modern mechanisms for dealing with them.  At best, someone will read
the message and learn something about writing more robust LaTeX code.
At worst, I wasted a few more minutes of my life.

> So can we expect to see these changes within an imminent update
> to the AMS class files:  amsart.cls , amsproc.cls  and any others?

Yup.  As I mentioned in my first response to the original poster, this
is a genuine bug and we will address it in the next release.  We don't
have a firm date for that yet, though.

> All the best for the New Year,

And the same to you.

David.