How to add more horizontal spacing in formulas when not using commas?

Questions
,
1

I have a number of Typst math formulas, which use exists and forall heavily:

$ forall K in RR exists N forall n >= N x_n > K $

The problem is, the resulting formula ends squashed together with little spacing around those characters, making it illegible:

image

Is there a way to increase spacing automatically, without littering the formulas with quad and such?

I could add a show rule:

#show sym.forall: it => h(0.5em) + it
#show sym.exists: it => h(0.5em) + it

Or redefine the elements manually:

#let forall = math.class("normal", h(0.5em) + sym.forall)
#let exists = math.class("normal", h(0.5em) + sym.exists)

But I was wondering if thereā€™s a way which scales for more symbols and also doesnā€™t add spacing if the symbol is first in a formula

2

In this specific example, adding commas might be better?

$ forall K in RR, exists N, forall n >= N, x_n > K. $

You could set weak: false to h(ā€¦).

#let forall = h(0.5em, weak: true) + sym.forall

|$forall n$|

|$A forall n$|

267Ɨ238 8.18 KB

In fact this is the trick in dif:

#repr($dif$)

equation(
  block: false,
  body: sequence(
    h(amount: 0.17em, weak: true),
    styled(child: [d], ..),
  ),
)
3

Thanks! The weak option solves the issue and is exactly what I was thinking about.

I thought about using commas, but I like the comma-less style more purely aesthetically

4

Fine, thatā€™s your choice. However, I still suggest adding the comma in āˆ€ n >= N, x_n > K, or it will become ambiguous in more complex cases: āˆ€ n >= N k x_n > K means āˆ€ n >= N k, x_n > K or āˆ€ n >= N, k x_n > K?

5

So, after thinking some more about it, I think you are right. Iā€™ve settled on this style:

forall K in RR, exists N : forall n >= N, x_n < K

image
image964Ɨ114 16.5 KB

I think my issue with the commas when I used them everywhere was that they meant both ā€œandā€ and ā€œsuch thatā€, and using the colon instead fixes this.

1 Like
6

I recently ran into this issue myself as well! I noticed that often I needed to type something like $forall space space v in V$ to make the math look reasonable. I also noticed that most math symbols (like $in$ or $gt$) donā€™t have this problem (i.e. they just have more built-in space around them). Iā€™m wondering if this this an intentional design choice or a bug, and if we can fix it if itā€™s the latter.