RE: [Aimmath-developers] AIM and Maple 9 not good news

[Greg G. <gr...@ma...>]

On Friday, 25 July 2003 12:19 PM, Jon wrote: 
> Greg,
> 
> Here is one response from the beta list
> 
> > In Maple 9, both the latex() command and the export to LaTeX 
> > functionality
> > available through the Export menu in the new Worksheet, use the same 
> > code and
> > are hence consistent with each other. To make this possible, 
> > line-breaking code
> > was inserted into the latex() code as you show below.
> >
> > Could you give an example that you are having problems with?
> ... 
> Note that Laurent doesn't mention that LaTeX is a module. Here is the 
> new undocumented LaTeX module
> 
> > > LaTeX(e);
> >
> > module () local DoExport, ExportInternal, KEYW, PROCBREAK, _break, 
> > _breakstring, _charcount, _count, _indentation, _lexicalseq, 
> > _localseq, _maxchars, _paramseq; export Export, Print, 
> > CheckLineBreak, 
> > CountCharacters, NoBreak, DoBreak, NoCount, DoCount, ResetCount, 
> > SetCount, ExportInert, ExportWorksheetExpression; end module(e)
> 
> So the real problem is not with latex/latex/*, but with the LaTeX/trim 
> and other functions using LaTeX. Would you agree? 

Yes ... if the only change is the addition of line-breaking code
which we don't need (and should make no difference to us) then
the redefinitions of `latex/...` should be fine.

So what is needed then is a shift of all the `LaTeX...`
commands of AIM to a new package file aim/LaTeX.mpl with functions
`LaTeX...` becoming `aim/LaTeX...` and all references to these 
functions in the .mpl files and quizzes being similarly changed.

I guess if we did this. Then we could have some conditional text
checking for whether the maple version was <= 8 and if so make
all the old `LaTeX...` names synonyms for the new names, to give
people some breathing space if they have used any `LaTeX...`
commands in their quizzes (like me).

To try all this out, what version of AIM are you experimenting with
... is it the one in develop_2_1?

> I think the most frustrating thing is that this change is not
> documented anywhere. I am suggesting that this be added to the
> help and what's new.

Yes, very annoying that the change wasn't mentioned in their documentation.

  Regards,
  Greg