I want to typeset unicode symbols like ≥ (U+2265) and ∧ (U+2227) in the typewriter / tt / monospaced / non-proportional font of my document. I don't care how I have to enter these symbols in my .tex files. Entering ≥ or using a commando like \ge is both fine as long as I can do so inside \texttt and \begin{verbatim}.  I know that I can enter unicode signs directly using \DeclareUnicodeCharacter{2265}{\ge}. However, the command \ge can only be used in math mode which changes the font. Therefore \texttt{$\ge$} is not a solution. Also, I have to use pdflatex so XeTeX or LuaLaTeX are not an option for me.  Is there a way to output a ≥ in the current non-math font?
121704
I have a listing to be used in verbatim (acutally Verbatim) that uses unicode characters such as ∀, ∃, →, ∨. Using  \DeclareUnicodeCharacter{2203}{\ensuremath\exists}   they do appear in the listing, but obviously in the wrong font.  For → I got the desired result using  \usepackage{textcomp} \DeclareUnicodeCharacter{2192}{\ifmmode\to\else\textrightarrow\fi}   but I do not see how to do it for ∃, ∀ and ∨.  MWE:  \documentclass{article} \usepackage[T1]{fontenc} \usepackage[utf8]{inputenc} \usepackage{textcomp} \DeclareUnicodeCharacter{2192}{\ifmmode\to\else\textrightarrow\fi} \DeclareUnicodeCharacter{2203}{\ensuremath\exists} \begin{document} \begin{verbatim} Make this → ∃ look nice! \end{verbatim} \end{document}   I’d like to stick to latex (i.e. not xetex). I would prefer to stick to the default type writer font (Computer Modern Typewriter), but if it only works with a different font (such as DejaVu Sans Mono), then that would be ok as well.
83071
This is a follow-up to .  Suppose you want to denote vectors by upright bold letters; then \mathbf{u} works fine, except that if it's a Greek letter you have to use \boldsymbol{\omega} instead.  Question: Is it possible to define a generic vector command in LaTeX which automatically chooses between \mathbf and \boldsymbol, so that one can write just \vect{u} and \vect{\omega} without having to treat the Greek symbols specially by hand?  (Just to be clear: \newcommand{\vect}[1]{\boldsymbol{#1}} is no good in this situation, since \boldsymbol{u} gives bold italic instead of roman.)
51650
I am trying to display vectors as bold and italic. The command \mathbf sets the letters non-italic. I also googled a bit and stumbled upon \mathbf{\em y} or \mathbfit{y}, which all didn't work.  I hope someone can help me on this.
47574
I often find myself adding a lot of \textsl{} around inside \emph{} or \textit{} blocks because I find italicized digits to look too "showoffy" and "baroque" and to hinder legibility (I'm using $$ when the number has a mathematical sense, but this situation occurs in less technical texts like CVs, and such.).  Could someone help me write a renewcommand to automate this, or better, a single low level command that makes \emph, \itshape, \textit and friends choose slanted over italic for numbers? I'm not too familiar with the low level latex font selection system nor with a way to detect digits from regular letters.  Edit: MWE of what I need and what I want to avoid  \documentclass{article} \begin{document} He thought: '\emph{Why 1234567890 apples?}' then he realized '\emph{ah yes, he has \textsl{1234567890} childs}' \end{document}   gives:   I find the italicized version (first one) of 2,3,4 and 7 to look especially bad.
14255
In ordinary LaTeX, one can easily add new math alphabets by using \DeclareMathAlphabet. One is then able to use, say, cmsy, eus, and rsfs letters side-by-side. Unfortunately, there does not seem to be a similar mechanism in unicode-math, or at the very least \DeclareMathAlphabet doesn't do what it's supposed to do.  Question. How can I set up my own math alphabets in unicode-math?   Attempted workarounds  Since unicode-math has lots of math alphabets, one workaround might be to replace an unused alphabet with the desired one using \setmathfont[range=...-&gt;...]. This doesn't quite work right in my example:  \documentclass[12pt]{article} \usepackage{fontspec,xltxtra,xunicode} \defaultfontfeatures{Mapping=tex-text}  \usepackage{unicode-math}  \scrollmode  \setmathfont{xits-math.otf} \setmathfont[range={\mathscr,\mathbfscr},StylisticSet=0]{xits-math.otf} \setmathfont[range={\mathcal,\mathbfcal},StylisticSet=1]{xits-math.otf} \setmathfont[range={\mathtt-&gt;\mathcal}]{latinmodern-math.otf}  \begin{document} \[ \begin{array}{c} \mathcal{A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z} \\ \mathscr{A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z} \\ \mathtt{A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z} \end{array} \]   I suspect the problem is that the codepoints of the calligraphic letters in Unicode are not contiguous.   Using \mathversion seems to work better:  \documentclass[12pt]{article} \usepackage{fontspec,xltxtra,xunicode} \defaultfontfeatures{Mapping=tex-text}  \usepackage{unicode-math}  \setmathfont{xits-math.otf}  \setmathfont[version=eucal]{latinmodern-math.otf} \newcommand{\eucal}[1]{\mathchoice %   {\mbox{\mathversion{eucal}$\displaystyle\mathscr{#1}$}} %   {\mbox{\mathversion{eucal}$\mathscr{#1}$}} %   {\mbox{\mathversion{eucal}$\scriptstyle\mathscr{#1}$}} %   {\mbox{\mathversion{eucal}$\scriptscriptstyle\mathscr{#1}$}}}  \setmathfont[range={\mathcal,\mathbfcal},StylisticSet=1]{xits-math.otf}  \begin{document} \[ \begin{array}{c} \mathcal{A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z} \\ \mathscr{A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z} \\ \eucal{A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z} \end{array} \] \end{document}   But this feels very inefficient.
99877
What OpenType math fonts are there available for usage in TeX/LaTeX, e.g. with the unicode-math package?  Here is a MWE which you can use to show off the font.  \documentclass{article} \pagestyle{empty}  \usepackage{amsmath} \DeclareMathOperator\Res{Res} \newcommand*\diff{\mathop{}\!\mathup{d}}  \usepackage{amsthm} \newtheorem{theorem}{Theorem}  \usepackage{unicode-math}  %%% % Set up you text and math fonts %%%  \begin{document}  \begin{theorem}[Residue theorem]   Let $f$ be analytic in the region $G$ except for the isolated   singularities $a_1,a_2,\dots,a_m$. If $\gamma$ is a closed   rectifiable curve in $G$ which does not pass through any of the   points $a_k$ and if $\gamma\approx 0$ in $G$, then   \[     \frac{1}{2\pi i} \int\limits_\gamma f\Bigl(x^{\mathbf{N}\in\mathbb{C}^{N\times 10}}\Bigr)     = \sum_{k=1}^m n(\gamma;a_k)\Res(f;a_k)\,.   \] \end{theorem}  \begin{theorem}[Maximum modulus]   Let $G$ be a bounded open set in $\BbbC$ and suppose that $f$ is a   continuous function on $G^-$ which is analytic in $G$. Then   \[     \max\{\, |f(z)|:z\in G^- \,\} = \max\{\, |f(z)|:z\in \partial G \,\}\,.   \] \end{theorem}  First some large operators both in text: $\iiint\limits_{Q}f(x,y,z) \diff x \diff y \diff z$ and $\prod_{\gamma\in\Gamma_{\bar{C}}}\partial(\tilde{X}_\gamma)$;\ and also on display \[   \iiiint\limits_{Q}f(w,x,y,z) \diff w \diff x \diff y \diff z   \leq   \oint_{\partial Q} f'\Biggl(\max\Biggl\{   \frac{\Vert w\Vert}{\vert w^2+x^2\vert};   \frac{\Vert z\Vert}{\vert y^2+z^2\vert};   \frac{\Vert w\oplus z\Vert}{\vert x\oplus y\vert}   \Biggr\}\Biggr)\,. \]  \end{document}   Here is a similar MWE for ConTeXt.  The images in the answer will only be shown for LaTeX output but the ConTeXt output looks very similar.  %%% % Set up you text and math fonts %%%  \setupmathlabeltext[Res=Res] \definemathcommand[Res][nolop]{\mfunctionlabeltext{Res}} \definemathcommand[diff]{\mathop{}\!\mfunctionlabeltext{diff}}  \defineenumeration   [theorem]   [text={Theorem},    style=italic,    title=yes,    titlestyle=normal,    distance=0pt,    titleleft={(},    titleright={).~},    alternative=serried,    width=fit]  \starttext    \starttheorem[title={Residue theorem}]     Let $f$ be analytic in the region $G$ except for the isolated     singularities $a_1,a_2,\dots,a_m$. If $\gamma$ is a closed     rectifiable curve in $G$ which does not pass through any of the     points $a_k$ and if $\gamma\approx 0$ in $G$, then     \startformula       \frac{1}{2\pi i} \int\limits_\gamma f\Bigl(x^{{\mathbf N}\in\mathbb{C}^{N\times 10}}\Bigr)       = \sum_{k=1}^m n(\gamma;a_k)\Res(f;a_k)\,.     \stopformula   \stoptheorem    \starttheorem[title={Maximum modulus}]     Let $G$ be a bounded open set in $\mathbb{C}$ and suppose that $f$ is a     continuous function on $G^-$ which is analytic in $G$. Then     \startformula       \max\{\, |f(z)|:z\in G^- \,\} = \max\{\, |f(z)|:z\in \partial G \,\}\,.     \stopformula   \stoptheorem    First some large operators both in text:   $\iiint\limits_{Q}f(x,y,z) \diff x \diff y \diff z$   and   $\prod_{\gamma\in\Gamma_{\bar{C}}}\partial(\tilde{X}_\gamma)$;\   and also on display   \startformula     \iiiint\limits_{Q}f(w,x,y,z) \diff w \diff x \diff y \diff z     \leq     \oint_{\partial Q} f'\Biggl(\max\Biggl\{     \frac{\Vert w\Vert}{\vert w^2+x^2\vert};     \frac{\Vert z\Vert}{\vert y^2+z^2\vert};     \frac{\Vert w\oplus z\Vert}{\vert x\oplus y\vert}     \Biggr\}\Biggr)\,.   \stopformula  \stoptext
68277
Often, during a conversation or an email, or at a forum, I would like to type some math, but I don't need full equation support. Unicode symbols should suffice.  What I need is an easy way to type math-related Unicode symbols. Since I already know LaTeX, it makes sense to use the LaTeX symbol mnemonics to type the math symbols.  What I currently did is to write an AutoHotkey script which automatically replaces LaTeX symbol names preceded by \ with the corresponding Unicode symbol, using the hotstring AutoHotkey feature. However, the AutoHotkey hotstrings proved unstable for many strings. Having a couple of tens lines would cause AHK to fail recognizing the strings from time to time.  Any other solution? (No, Alt+(Unicode number) isn't convenient enough.)  Attached is my AHK script. The PutUni function is taken from .  ::\infty:: PutUni("e2889e") return ::\sum:: PutUni("e28891") return ::\int:: PutUni("e288ab") return ::\pm:: PutUni("c2b1") return ::\alpha:: PutUni("c991") return ::\beta:: PutUni("c992") return ::\phi:: PutUni("c9b8") return ::\delta:: PutUni("ceb4") return ::\pi:: PutUni("cf80") return ::\omega:: PutUni("cf89") return ::\in:: PutUni("e28888") return ::\notin:: PutUni("e28889") return ::\iff:: PutUni("e28794") return ::\leq:: PutUni("e289a4") return ::\geq:: PutUni("e289a5") return ::\sqrt:: PutUni("e2889a") return ::\neq:: PutUni("e289a0") return ::\subset:: PutUni("e28a82") return ::\nsubset:: PutUni("e28a84") return ::\nsubseteq:: PutUni("e28a88") return ::\subseteq:: PutUni("e28a86") return ::\prod:: PutUni("e2888f") return ::\N:: PutUni("e28495") return
100298
Is there a way to typeset the symbol ":⇔" correctly in LaTeX (i.e. with the right alignment and spacing)?  I know that using :\Leftrightarrow or :\Longleftrightarrow gets me the symbol I'm looking for (more or less), but the spacing doesn't look right to me. Constructions using \iff or \colon didn't really seem to do the trick, either.   Do I have to define such a symbol myself (if so: how?), or is there a package proving this? Unfortunately, I did not find anything myself (especially because I don't know what to search for exactly; I got the description "defined to be logically equivalent" from Wikipedia, since I didn't even know the correct name).
110695
I'd like to add the Unicode skull and crossbones to my shell prompt (specifically the 'SKULL AND CROSSBONES' (U+2620)), but I can't figure out the magic incantation to make echo spit it, or any other, 4-digit Unicode character. Two-digit one's are easy. For example, echo -e &quot;\x55&quot;, . In addition to the answers below it should be noted that, obviously, your terminal needs to support Unicode for the output to be what you expect. gnome-terminal does a good job of this, but it isn't necessarily turned on by default. On macOS's Terminal app Go to Preferences-&gt; Encodings and choose Unicode (UTF-8).
40427
I'm looking after a macro to write the (La)TeX logo (with parentheses), i.e. something similar to \TeX, \LaTeX, but where the output includes ()'s.
96455
I've been using the  for the ellipsis, 8230, for some time now, in several applications. A few days ago it stopped working, and &amp; is displayed instead of … when pressing Alt+8+2+3+0 (on numpad). This happened both on my desktop and on my laptop (where I use it with Fn). Both run on 64bit-Win-7 with code page 850, and both might have recently updated Windows and Opera 12.  What could be the reason this input method got disabled, and how do I switch it back?  By the way, I just found out that Alt+0+1+3+3 does work. Also I found out that Alt+8+2+3+0 still works in WordPad or MsWord10, but neither in Opera nor Notepad++ - there the character code is translated modulus 256 before insertion.
66809
When I write {{\tilde{C}}^{0}_{har}}^{\Gamma} (or the same with fewer curly brackets) in Tex I obtain a double superscript error and I can't solve it. Does someone know how to fix this?
49271
I am happy with the great majority of what unicode-math does. But at times I find that I prefer a symbol the way it was before. With \varnothing and \complement, for example. In those cases I was able to save them under a different name before loading unicode-math, but this doesn't always work.  Right now I'm trying to access the \mathcal alphabet from plain LaTeX. How might I accomplish this?    Additional Question  I've been looking through unicode-math, trying to figure out where exactly the original \mathcal alphabet gets discarded, but I eventually gave up.  It would be interesting if someone could explain:   how/where the original \mathcal font is defined anyway, and what kind of 'switch' is thrown by unicode-math that makes it unavailable.
32411
The title pretty much says it all: how can I type Unicode characters - specifically the em-dash —?
12676
This is a follow up question from . The original problem has been solved using siunitx instead of dcolumn. However, the problem is that I am using mathpazo with osf as my main body font and eulervm as my math font. With siunitx used to decimal align tables this results in []() symbols being drawn in the math font, but the digits being drawn in the text font, as the following MWE example illustrates.  Is it possible to draw the symbols in the normal text font or redefine the mathfont for S columns completely?  \documentclass{scrartcl} \usepackage{booktabs} \usepackage[osf]{mathpazo} \usepackage[euler-digits]{eulervm}  % For Tables created by estout \newcommand{\sym}[1]{\ensuremath{^{#1}}} % for symbols in Table \usepackage{siunitx} \sisetup{ detect-mode,            group-digits            = false ,           input-signs             = ,           input-symbols           = ()[]-+ ,           input-open-uncertainty  = ,           input-close-uncertainty = ,           table-align-text-post   = false          } \begin{document} \begin{tabular*}{\textwidth}{     l @{\extracolsep\fill} *{2}{S[table-format=4.4]} @{}} \toprule \multicolumn{1}{@{}l}{\emph{Age}}  \\[0.5ex] 18--24 &amp;   [-1360.228]\sym{*}  &amp;  -1371.941\sym{*}  \\        &amp;       (6.915)         &amp;    (-7.953)        \\ 25--34 &amp;     -219.216          &amp;   -240.271         \\        &amp;     (514.894)         &amp;   (515.348)        \\ 35--44 &amp;     -310.715          &amp;   -311.438         \\        &amp;     (485.780)         &amp;   (486.013)        \\ 55$+$  &amp;       -5.135          &amp;     [2.656]        \\        &amp;      (53.267)         &amp;   (533.875)        \\ \bottomrule \end{tabular*} \end{document}   Edit: Thanks to David the problem has been solved including a fix for amsmath and extending to XeTeX. On a side note, the command for * generated by estoutshould now be simply plain text:  \newcommand{\sym}{#1} % for symbols in Table  \newcommand{\sym}[1]{\rlap{$#1$}} % Thanks to David Carlise again.
61768
It is well known that you can make the font italic or bold using \textit{} or \textbf{}. However, if I have an italic or bold font, what command can I use to make it nonitalic or nonbold?
44031
How to create the following symbol?