gm@romeo.cs.duke.edu (Greg McGary) (10/06/88)
Has anyone out there attacked the problem of generating english
spelling of numbers from TeX?
Such an animal would work like so:
\count255=123
\englishnum\count255 ==> one-hundered twenty three
How about a numeric `pretty printer' like so:
\count255=1234567
\prettynum\count255 ==> 1,234,567
Or a `dollar printer' like so:
\count255=1234567
\dollarnum ==> $12,345.67
These seem like logical companions to \number and \romannumeral, and
would be *much* easier to implement as built-ins; though they are
probably doable with some hairy set of macros. I'm trying to avoid
getting too deeply involved in TeXarcana, but I'll give it a whirl
if no one else has done so.
--gm
-- Greg McGary
-- {decvax,ihnp4,mcnc}!duke!gm
-- gm@cs.duke.edujbn@glacier.STANFORD.EDU (John B. Nagle) (10/06/88)
One can get carried away with macro languages.
Now a algebraic simplifier for expressions written as a TeX macro
would be really somthing. This would add a whole new dimension to the
concept of "pretty-printing" of mathematical formulae.
John Nagledmocsny@uceng.UC.EDU (daniel mocsny) (10/07/88)
In article <17769@glacier.STANFORD.EDU>, jbn@glacier.STANFORD.EDU (John B. Nagle) writes: > Now a algebraic simplifier for expressions written as a TeX macro > would be really somthing. This would add a whole new dimension to the > concept of "pretty-printing" of mathematical formulae. I have not had a crack at using S. Wolfram's _Mathematica_, but I understand that it either does or will lead us to something like ``living'' math texts. It does this by presenting color graphics to illustrate formulae, in such a way that the reader does not have to settle for a static text. Anyone out there know more? And does Mathematica know about TeX/LaTeX? How many times I have longed for a computer smart enough to ``understand'' applied math literature. Since paper-based journals have space limits, most authors have to severely compress their models, methods, etc., to the very highest-level description. Therefore days, weeks, or months must pass from the time I read such a paper until I can either write or beg and port code to implement the model, method, etc. on my own machine. However, the translation is entirely mechanical---i.e., expanding the high-level description into code is only detail work (most of the time :-). So why can't I simply hand the paper to my computer and say, ``Run this.'' In the old days people published things you could use immediately (plots, nomograms, closed-form solutions, etc.). Now everyone announces their latest interactive, object-oriented, globally optimizing gizmo, but we still have no universal way to really disseminate such results. This retards our ability to understand, benefit from, and review each other's work. Dan Mocsny