-% \begin{meta-comment}
-%
-% $Id: mdwmath.dtx,v 1.2 2003/09/05 16:14:36 mdw Exp $
-%
-% Various nicer mathematical things
-%
-% (c) 2003 Mark Wooding
-%
-% \end{meta-comment}
-%
% \begin{meta-comment} <general public licence>
%%
%% mdwmath package -- various nicer mathematical things
%<+oldeqnarray> [1996/04/11 1.1 Old enhanced eqnarray]
% \end{meta-comment}
%
-% \CheckSum{729}
+% \CheckSum{740}
%% \CharacterTable
%% {Upper-case \A\B\C\D\E\F\G\H\I\J\K\L\M\N\O\P\Q\R\S\T\U\V\W\X\Y\Z
%% Lower-case \a\b\c\d\e\f\g\h\i\j\k\l\m\n\o\p\q\r\s\t\u\v\w\x\y\z
% Having just tried to do some simple things, I've found that there are maths
% symbols missing. Here they are, in all their glory:
% \begin{center} \unverb\| \begin{tabular}{cl|cl|cl}
-% $\&$ & "\&" & $\bitor$ & "\bitor" & $\dbland$ & "\dbland" \\
-% $\bitand$ & "\bitand" & $\dblor$ & "\dblor" &
+% $\&$ & "\&" & $\bitor$ & "\bitor" & $\dbland$ & "\dbland" \\
+% $\bitand$ & "\bitand" & $\dblor$ & "\dblor" &
% \end{tabular} \end{center}
%
% \DescribeMacro\xor
% \DescribeMacro\negl
% A few esoteric new operator names are supplied.
% \begin{center} \unverb\| \begin{tabular}{cl|cl|cl}
-% $\keys$ & "\keys" & $\dom$ & "\dom" & $\ran$ & "\ran" \\
-% $\supp$ & "\supp" & $\lcm$ & "\lcm" & $\ord$ & "\ord" \\
-% $\poly$ & "\poly" & $\negl$ & "\negl"
+% $\keys$ & "\keys" & $\dom$ & "\dom" & $\ran$ & "\ran" \\
+% $\supp$ & "\supp" & $\lcm$ & "\lcm" & $\ord$ & "\ord" \\
+% $\poly$ & "\poly" & $\negl$ & "\negl"
% \end{tabular} \end{center}
% I think |\lcm| ought to be self-explanatory. The |\dom| and |\ran|
% operators pick out the domain and range of a function, respectively; thus,
% This also sets |\qedsymbol| if it's not set already.
% \qed
%
+% \subsection{Punctuation in displays}
+%
+% It's conventional to follow displayed equations with the necessary
+% punctuation for them to fit into the surrounding prose. This isn't
+% universal: Ian Stewart says in the preface to the third edition of his
+% \emph{Galois Theory}:\footnote{^^A
+% Chapman \& Hall/CRC Mathematics, 2004; ISBN 1-58488-393-6.} ^^A
+% \begin{quote}
+% Along the way I made once change that may raise a few eyebrows. I have
+% spent much of my career telling students that written mathematics should
+% have punctuation as well as symbols. If a symbol or a formula would be
+% followed by a comma if it were replaced by a word or phrase, then it
+% should be followed by a comma; however strange the formula then looks.
+%
+% I still think that punctuation is essential for formulas in the main body
+% of the text. If the formula is $t^2 + 1$, say, then it should have its
+% terminating comma. But I have come to the conclusion that eliminating
+% visual junk from the printed page is more important than punctuatory
+% pedantry, so that when the same formula is \emph{displayed}, for example
+% \[ t^2 + 1 \]
+% then it looks silly if the comma is included, like this,
+% \[ t^2 + 1 \mpunct{,} \]
+% and everything is much cleaner and less ambiguous without punctuation.
+%
+% Purists will hate this, though many of them would not have noticed had I
+% not pointed it out here. Until recently, I would have agreed. But I
+% think it is time we accepted that the act of displaying a formula equips
+% it with \emph{implicit} (invisible) punctuation. This is the 21st
+% century, and typography has moved on.
+% \end{quote}%
+%
+% \DescribeMacro\mpunct
+% I tended to agree with Prof.\ Stewart, even before I read his preface; but
+% now I'm not so sure, and it's clear that we're in the minority. Therefore,
+% the command |\mpunct| sets its argument as text, a little distance from
+% the preceding mathematics.
+%
% \begin{ignore}
% There used to be an eqnarray here, but that's migrated its way into the
% \package{mdwtab} package. Maybe the original version, without dependency
% The types provided (and it's easy-ish to add more) are:
%
% \def\ch{\char`}
-% \begin{description} \def\makelabel{\hskip\labelsep\normalfont\ttfamily}
+% \begin{description} \setdescriptionlabel{\normalfont\ttfamily#1}
% \item [r] Right aligned equation
% \item [c] Centre-aligned equation
% \item [l] Left aligned equation
%
% \begin{demo}[w]{Lots of equations}
%\begin{eqnarray}[rl:rl:l]
-% V_i &= v_i - q_i v_j, & X_i &= x_i - q_i x_j, &
+% V_i &= v_i - q_i v_j, & X_i &= x_i - q_i x_j, &
% U_i = u_i, \qquad \mbox{for $i \ne j$} \label{eq:A} \\
% V_j &= v_j, & X_j &= x_j &
% U_j u_j + \sum_{i \ne j} q_i u_i.
%
% Now we need to do some more calculating (don't you hate it?). As far as
% Appendix~G is concerned, $\theta=h(y)=0$, because we want no rule over the
-% top.
+% top.
%
% \begin{macrocode}
\@tempdima\ht\tw@%
% \item |\hfill| glue to push the little rule to the end of the line.
% \item A little square rule `\qedrule', with some small kerns around it.
% \item A glue item to counter the effect of glue added at the paragraph
-% boundary.
+% boundary.
% \end{itemize}
%
% The vertical mode case is simpler, but less universal. It copes with
% \end{macro}
% \end{macro}
%
+% \subsection{Punctuation in displays}
+%
+% \begin{macro}{\mpunct}
+%
+% This is actually a little more subtle than you'd expect. If the
+% \package{amstext} package is loaded, or something else has defined the
+% |\text| command, then we should use that; otherwise, just drop a box in and
+% hope for the best.
+%
+% \begin{macrocode}
+\def\mpunct#1{%
+ \,%
+ \ifx\text\@@undefined\hbox%
+ \else\expandafter\text\fi%
+ {#1}%
+}
+% \end{macrocode}
+%
+%\end{macro}
+%
% \begin{ignore}
% The following is the original definition of the enhanced eqnarray
% environment. It's not supported, although if you can figure out how to
~mdw / mdwtools / blobdiff