[TxMt] LaTeX grammer for subscript

Guido Governatori guido at itee.uq.edu.au
Tue Nov 13 08:39:52 UTC 2007

On 13/11/2007, at 4:04 PM, Allan Odgaard wrote:

> On 12 Nov 2007, at 06:17, Guido Governatori wrote:
>> [...]
>> Maybe I have not understood how include, but if I write a grammar  
>> where patterns contains only an include statement, don't I "create  
>> a copy" of the included grammar under a different name?
> Well, you include it, yes.

Allan, thanks for the explanation.

> But if the included grammar does something like “begin = '\('; end  
> = '\)'; patterns = ( … );” then the rules you put in the grammar  
> where you include the former, will not be active inside (…).

I did some experiments, and it seems that it depends whether the  
inner patterns (...) includes itself or not. Better, if it only  
includes itself (i.e., $self), then the definition external to the  
include are not considered in the patterns; if it uses includes =  
'$base' the external definitions are parsed inside the inner patterns.

> Since LaTeX does a lot of this nesting of rules, it is generally  
> not possible to add a new rule then include the old grammar, and  
> expect the new rule to work in all contexts.

I see that in some cases text.tex includes with $self. So scopes with  
$self cannot be extended while scopes with base can.

All the best

Dr Guido Governatori
School of Information Technology and Electrical Engineering
The University of Queensland
Brisbane, Queensland, 4072, Australia
Phone: +61-(0)7-336 52907
Fax: +61-(0)7-336 54999

More information about the textmate mailing list