[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
More rubbish about arrows
- To: math-font-discuss@cogs.susx.ac.uk
- Subject: More rubbish about arrows
- From: alanje@cogs.susx.ac.uk (Alan Jeffrey)
- Date: Sat, 14 Aug 93 13:21 BST
I'm sure you're all heartily sick and tired of hearing about arrows by
now, but...
I've been playing around with VFs trying to implement the control glyphs
for the arrow-building kit I sent out last week. As a reminder, the
syntax there was:
<leftarrow><rightarrow><extarrow>^*
For example, a negated long long right arrow was:
<leftarrowhead><rightarrowhead><extarrowone><extarrowneg><extarrowone>
Unfortunately, it turns out that this syntax is a total pig to implement
using TeX's ligtable, since the kern table ends up spending most of its
time swapping the <rightarrow> and <extarrow> glyphs around. A much
simpler syntax to implement is:
<leftarrow><extarrow>^*<rightarrow>
The advantage of this is that it's much easier to implement! The
disadvantage is that you can't have a single <leftarrownone> control glyph
meaning `there is no arrow on the left end of this glyph'. Instead, you
need to have different <leftarrow> control glyphs depending on whether
the <rightarrow> is a single arrow, a double arrow, a triple arrow, two
stacked harpoons, or two stacked arrows, since these need different
extension glyphs.
Unless anyone objects violently to this change (seems pretty unlikely to
me!) I'll put together a test implemention of this version of the
arrow-building kit, and see what it looks like.
Alan.