Received: by nummer-3.proteosys id <01C19442.D36DB2D4@nummer-3.proteosys>; Thu, 3 Jan 2002 11:38:47 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C19442.D36DB2D4" x-vm-v5-data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil t nil][nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil]) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Subject: Gotcha in thebibliography Date: Sat, 18 Aug 1990 18:15:10 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: From: "Nelson H. F. Beebe" To: "Rainer Schoepf" Reply-To: "LaTeX-L Mailing list" Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 226 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C19442.D36DB2D4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I just hit what I view as a design flaw in thebibliography environment. It was precipitated by the following BibTeX bibliography entry in the .bbl file: \bibitem{Steele:floating-point-output} Guy~L. {Steele Jr.} and Jon~L. White. \newblock How to print floating-point numbers accurately. \newblock {\em ACM SIG\-PLAN Notices}, 25(6):112--126, June 1990. \newblock In electronic mail dated Wed, 27 Jun 90 11:55:36 EDT, Guy Steele reported that an intrepid pre-SIGPLAN 90 conference implementation of what is stated in the paper revealed 3 mistakes: \begin{enumerate} \item Table~9 (page 125):\par\noindent \begin{tabular}{ll} for & {\tt -1:USER!({"}{"});} \\ substitute & {\tt -1:USER!({"}0{"});} \end{tabular} \par\noindent and delete the comment. \item Table~10 (page 125):\par\noindent \begin{tabular}{ll} for & {\tt fill(-k, {"}0{"})}\\ substitute & {\tt fill(-k-1, {"}0{"})} \end{tabular} \item Table~5 (page 124):\par\noindent insert {\tt k <-- 0} after assertion, and also delete {\tt k <-- 0} from Table~6. \end{enumerate} The effect of this is that the next bibliography entry gets number 4, one more than the last enumerate counter. The reason lies in latex.tex: % The thebibliography environment is a list environment. To save the % use of an extra counter, it should use enumiv as the item counter. For now, I will switch to an itemize instead of enumerate. The question for this list is, is the saving of an extra counter at what is usually almost the end of a document anyway worth this design gotcha? I suggest not. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C19442.D36DB2D4 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Gotcha in thebibliography

I just hit what I view as a design flaw in = thebibliography
environment.  It was precipitated by the = following BibTeX
bibliography entry in the .bbl file:

\bibitem{Steele:floating-point-output}
Guy~L. {Steele Jr.} and Jon~L. White.
\newblock How to print floating-point numbers = accurately.
\newblock {\em ACM SIG\-PLAN Notices}, = 25(6):112--126, June 1990.
\newblock In electronic mail dated Wed, 27 Jun 90 = 11:55:36 EDT, Guy
Steele reported that an intrepid pre-SIGPLAN 90 = conference
implementation of what is stated in the paper = revealed 3 mistakes:

  \begin{enumerate}
    \item
         = Table~9 (page 125):\par\noindent
        = \begin{tabular}{ll}
          for = & {\tt -1:USER!({"}{"});} \\
          = substitute & {\tt -1:USER!({"}0{"});}
        = \end{tabular} \par\noindent
       and delete the = comment.
    \item
          Table~10 = (page 125):\par\noindent
          = \begin{tabular}{ll}
          &nbs= p; for & {\tt fill(-k, {"}0{"})}\\
          &nbs= p; substitute & {\tt fill(-k-1, {"}0{"})}
          = \end{tabular}
    \item
          Table~5 = (page 124):\par\noindent
          insert = {\tt k <-- 0} after assertion, and also delete {\tt k
          <-- = 0} from Table~6.
  \end{enumerate}

The effect of this is that the next bibliography entry = gets
number 4, one more than the last enumerate = counter.  The reason
lies in latex.tex:

%  The thebibliography environment is a list = environment.  To save the
%  use of an extra counter, it should use  = enumiv  as the item counter.

For now, I will switch to an itemize instead of = enumerate.

The question for this list is, is the saving of an = extra counter
at what is usually almost the end of a document = anyway worth this
design gotcha?  I suggest not.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C19442.D36DB2D4--