I am using WinShell as editor for my Latex text. I use GiHub to share my test with others. My problem is in my WinShell the text is wrapped correctly. But in GiHub, the text appears not the same. The paragraph appears in one extremely long line. This is causing me problems because when someone edits a word, the whole paragraph is marked as changed instead of that line only.  It seems GitHub is not able to get the wrapping that is done in my WinShell editor. How can preserver the text wrapping mode from WinShell to GiHub?
122656
It seems that hard-wrapping - i.e. inserting a newline when the line reaches a certain threshold - is extremely common in the LaTeX source when writing technical papers, either by manually inserting it or by letting the text editor take care of it.  After years of writing text in soft-wrapping environment (text is displayed wrapped, but no newline is actually inserted), I find it hard to understand why hard-wrapping is so commonly used. I think understanding the reason(s) behind it will make me less resentful about using it.  What are the disadvantages and advantages of using hard-wrap vs. soft-wrap, and why is hard-wrap so commonly used with LaTeX?
38960
On Solaris, if you open a file in vi that has Windows line endings, this shows up as ^M at the end of every line.  On Linux, vi is cleverer and understands the Windows file format, and does not display ^M.  Is there a setting to make Linux vi behave the same as Solaris in this respect?  A common problem for us is copying a shell script off a (Windows) dev box and forgetting to dos2unix it, and then being confused when it doesn't work properly. On Solaris the problem is obvious as soon as you vi the file, but not on Linux.  Thanks.
77280
I have looked around and found no answer to this question.  I am using the changes package, and I need to remove all markup from the source file. There's  about using the , but sadly it goes unanswered.   My questions are these: why is the script not working, and is there a way to make it work ? Is there another script ? (hopefully one that can be used on a windows machine as well)   Some background - I am using a lubuntu 16.04 machine.   I am trying to remove the markup from the following file to no avail:  \documentclass{article}  \usepackage{changes} %I could use [final] to hide the markup from the PDF, but I need the ``evidence'' removed from the source  \begin{document}  Some text \added{some added text}, and some \replaced{replaced}{replactd} text. \deleted{also, some deleted.} \end{document}   I placed the script in the same folder as input.tex, made the script executable and used  sh ./delcmdchanges.bash -i input.tex output.tex   I get no error, no query as to found markup, and the output file contents is identical to the input.
56106
I am writing a scientific paper with my collaborator. We have submitted a version to a journal and now we got a review from them, so we need to fix a few things. In Microsoft Word there is the option to "track changes", which displays the deleted text as crossed out and the new text bolded (if I remember the details correctly). Is there a way to achieve a similar result in LaTeX?  I was thinking to create a new file for the revised version and then write a script which would basically compare the two files and make the differences either bold or crossed out before sending it to latex. Is there a tool that already does it?
23297
I have a whole section full of text that contains lots of letters with supscripts. I've been using math mode to do this, but the result doesn't look so nice with all the letters in italics (it looks like a math paper when it isn't).   I also know about \textsubscript to use subscripts outside of math mode. Is there a way I could wrap my entire section in an environment to disable italics in math mode?  \documentclass[11pt]{article} \begin{document} Lorem ipsum $A_1$ dolor sit $B_1$ amet, consetetur sadipscing $C_1$ elitr, sed diam nonumy $AB_1$ eirmod tempor invidunt $BA_1$ ut labore et $ABC_1$ dolore magna aliquyam $B_2$ erat, sed diam $A_1$, $A_2$, $A_3$ voluptua. At vero eos et $B_1$ accusam et justo duo $C_2$ dolores et ea rebum. \end{document}
42335
issue also opened at     When I compile this MWE latex file in texstudio, on windows, using MikTex, then view the result using texstudio internal PDF viewer, it shows white streak lines going over the image. These lines are not in the original image.  Also these lines do not show up when I view the compiled PDF file using external PDF reader such as adobe.   Why is that?  The image is also a PDF file. Is it possible to resolve it? It is not a big issue really, since this seems to be just an artifact of texstudio pdf viewer itself, but thought to ask if there is an option to fix this.  Here is MWE  \documentclass{article} \usepackage{graphicx} \begin{document} This is my image, as PDF file, imported using includegraphics  \includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{image}     \end{document}   I put the file image.pdf is on my web page   This is how the compiled PDF looks like inside texstudio PDF viewer    This is how the PDF looks like inside adobe PRO pdf reader    Notice the white lines that show up in texstudio. This is pdfinfo on the image file  pdfinfo image.pdf   Creator:        Wolfram Mathematica 11.2.0.0 for Microsoft Windows (64-bit) (September 10, 2017) Student Edition - Personal Use Only Producer:        CreationDate:   Sat Mar  3 16:13:39 2018 ModDate:        Sat Mar  3 16:13:39 2018 Tagged:         no UserProperties: no Suspects:       no Form:           none JavaScript:     no Pages:          1 Encrypted:      no Page size:      470 x 367 pts Page rot:       0 File size:      99049 bytes Optimized:      no PDF version:    1.5   I am using   TeXstudio 2.12.6 (hg 6632:7777b2b8a906) Using Qt Version 5.9.1, compiled with Qt 5.9.1 R   Windows 7.
45296
To get this off the table now and avoid any confusion ... This is for Linux running in Windows 10(ubunutu), also known as WSL. Its not the same as cygwin and windows or stand alone linux. It is it's own beast.  So please keep the above in mind before I am referenced with all the articles I have already read or comment that this has been asked before.  Does anyone know how to make the copy and paste work off of the windows clipboard OR the WSL Ubuntu Linux emulation? I am using set clipboard=unnamedplus. It's not working, not matter what combinations I use like yy, "+yy, etc.  Yes, it's vim-gtk with +xterm_clipboard support.
27109
I am using TeXstudio to edit Latex and create pdf files. The text is not smooth in the pdf files created by TeXstudio in my computer. When I zoom in, it will be   But if I use my friend's computer to generate the pdf files, it will be like below when I zoom in to see    Both computers have Windows 7 as OS, same Version of TeXstudio. What settings should I change to make the text smooth?  Edited:  I created two pdf files from same .tex files by TeXstudio in my and my friend's computers. The files can be downloaded in below link
44625
LaTeX has soul. ConTeXt, of course, , where you can put sweet hightligher under your text for free!    In the pictured example, you can see highlights that not only highlight, but that do it with cool edges that look so good, you can smell fumes! The fearless author says he'll show how that was done in another post; this one shows only how to lay down a straight, yellow box. But, it is possible to do word-wrapped highlighting with cool-shapped boxes within ConTeXt, presumably.  The trouble for me is that getting into the ConTeXt world is steep climb right now, given the state of documentation and the flux of changes, so I need to continue with LaTeX. But the real problem is that now I can't live without the Organic-Looking Highlights of Awesomeness in that picture!  As I said, Non-Organic-Looking Highlights of the Ordinary are easy with the soul package:  \hl{Some awesome text that word wraps fine.}   It just taunts me on the page with its straight lines. So, if I sacrifice word wrapping, I can use PGF/TiKz and create the following macro:  \newcommand\hl[1]{%     \tikz[baseline,%       decoration={random steps,amplitude=1pt,segment length=15pt},%       outer sep=-15pt, inner sep = 0pt%     ]%    \node[decorate,rectangle,fill=navcolor,anchor=text]{#1\xspace};% }%   Which creates something like this:    Now, my color is too dark and my randomness needs adjusting, but you see that a similar effect could be achieved.  My trouble is that I don't understand TeX enough to dig into the Soul package and add the TiKz/PGF goodness that it so sorely needs. So, I leave it to you guys. Anyone want to tackle this?   Or is it yet another piece of fruit, just a touch out of reach, that shall have to wait until ConTeXt settles down?
116434
This question follows directly from . In this case I am specifically unable to understand the part which says:     In that regard, its behaviour is closer to emacs' than with   bash(readline)/ksh/zsh emacs mode, but departs from the terminal   driver embedded line editor (in canonical mode), where Ctrl-W deletes   the previous word (werase, also in vi).   Here we are talking about shells and not editors which are two completely different programs. What does it mean to say shell is in some editor mode?  P.S: You can base your answer on the premise that I understand what a shell is and how to use vim for basic editing.
82402
Notes:  Answers will occasionally be moved to the  when there are too many of them. When using them to report bugs, keep an eye on the post.    This site, Meta Stack Exchange, is usually used as a &quot;test bed&quot; for pending changes happening to the way text is rendered on all network sites. Changes to text rendering that are going to be rolled out to the network are usually deployed here first to test them out and fix any potential glitches. Currently, there are no such changes pending, but if there were, keep in mind that text posted here may render differently from the other sites until the changes roll out to them as well.    As per Jeff's suggestion in : You can use this question as a formatting sandbox. You can:  edit  itself ( questions such as this one require only 100 reputation to edit instead of 2,000) post answers to this question (This question might be , requiring earning 10 reputation on this site to answer) post comments to this question or its answers test suspected bugs with the editor or the rendering post ponies (only when mods are asleep)   Beware that since the  in December 2010, and  added in March 2011, no syntax highlighting is applied unless the question's tags or an inline hint enable it. So, to test highlighting here in the sandbox:  , you can use GitHub-flavor fenced code blocks in your posts, specifying the language after the opening fence: ```html While not hinted otherwise: &lt;html&gt;&lt;/html&gt; source &lt;b&gt;goes&lt;/b&gt; &quot;here&quot;. ```  ```js var a = 3; while (not (a &gt; 0)) {     alert(&quot;JavaScript code &lt;b&gt;goes&lt;/b&gt; here.&quot;); } ```   Or:  Create code blocks in any way (using the fence notation above, the four-space indent form, or using HTML &lt;pre&gt;&lt;code&gt; tags).  Save your post.  Use your browser's developer tools to edit the resulting HTML. To open developer tools, press F12, or ⌥⌘ I on Mac.  Find the &lt;pre&gt; element and add the attribute class=&quot;prettyprint&quot;, or change it into one of the valid syntax hints linked above, like class=&quot;lang-vb prettyprint&quot;.  Run the following in the location bar: javascript:prettyPrint(); or prettyPrint() in the console.     Answers that are considered annoying or obnoxious, or that cause breakage for users, will be deleted. This is .
6848
With text, you have a really handy control called 'offset', which allows you to easily increase/decrease the size of your letters from their centres not by changing the shape proportionally but by adding/detracting from its outline, which looks like this (border remains uniform):    By contrast, when trying to scale down a mesh object using the 's' it looks like this (borders not uniform):    Is there a similar 'offset' control that allows similar for mesh objects or any other way of achieving the same result? Seems odd that such a useful tool would be exclusive to text.
110302
I need to format extremely long strings of text. I would like to be able to specify their width, and have them wrap, with or without some special symbol to indicate that the line is wrapped. The problem is, however, that these strings do not contain any spaces. Here's an example of what I would like:  \foo{2in} {17823941237490812347123904712389407123408917234890123748912034712985712389012351}   So I would like to get an hbox containing this long number, but spanning several lines, so that I get a rectangle 2in wide.  Does anyone know of a package/trick/macro that does this?
102175
I think I've seen a script for converting mediawiki syntax to Latex. Also, in case there are more than one solution for this, it might be nice to summarize them here.
10251
Here, it is just a example. I have a line:  aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa   Now, I want to let LaTeX automatically wrap the line according to the width of the text block/margins.
94612
I'm having a problem that I've had before and I'm tired of hacking my way through it and hope that there is some supported solution.  I'll go ahead and create a document for example:  \documentclass {article} \begin{document} \section {Introduction} In the introduction of the document, you will find plenty of verbatim \verb|texts that| have an hard time wrapping. \end{document}   So, the problem here is that the \verb environment doesn't wrap well (unlike the example I posted above where I put in the return to aid in viewing).  There is an overfull hbox error.  How can I make the \verb command wrap and justify with its surroundings better?  I would expect LaTeX to just increase or decrease the spacing around the \verb command.  Is it just too much smooshing or stretching for LaTeX to agree to do it?  Thanks in advance for any help.  [EDIT] After reading  I think that \texttt may be the right way to go here.  This considerably covers the question above, but the question still stands: What about \verb?  [EDIT] Also see the related question about \texttt{}
77813
Is there an application (in Windows, Unix, or Mac) that allows you to edit the LaTeX generated PDF. I know there is pdfsync, but it only gives you the line, and then you have to search where in the line you want to make the change. This is OK sometimes, for a couple of changes, but when there are lots of changes it becomes really tedious.  I would really like to accelerate this process of correcting mistakes (mostly grammar, missing commas etc.). in my document, without going through all the markup.