Talk:Combat system: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
VANKRASN39 (talk | contribs) m (response) |
VANKRASN39 (talk | contribs) mNo edit summary |
||
Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
[[User:ZHOUY1|ZHOUY1]] ([[User talk:ZHOUY1|talk]]) 13:52, 6 October 2016 (CDT) |
[[User:ZHOUY1|ZHOUY1]] ([[User talk:ZHOUY1|talk]]) 13:52, 6 October 2016 (CDT) |
||
:How about only bunching when there's a subscripted part? It's really rough to read. [[User:VANKRASN39|VANKRASN39]] ([[User talk:VANKRASN39|talk]]) 14:27, 6 October 2016 (CDT) |
:How about only bunching when there's a subscripted part? It's really rough to read. I also really prefer brackets instead of double parentheses [( ... )] vs (( ... )). [[User:VANKRASN39|VANKRASN39]] ([[User talk:VANKRASN39|talk]]) 14:27, 6 October 2016 (CDT) |
Revision as of 13:30, 6 October 2016
Didn't you want \cdots and not Xs? Spaces are also much easier to read. VANKRASN39 (talk) 13:36, 6 October 2016 (CDT)
I tried a few ways of formatting these formulas and prefer this over the alternatives, and it has to do with the multi-word variable names.
- While is better than , I don't think is necessarily more intuitive, and since the reader won't mix up with if all the variables are long words it's fine to let stand.
- Subscript scoping makes more sense in non-spaced variables. Compare: vs. : it's more obvious in the first case that the subscript applies to the entire variable name.
ZHOUY1 (talk) 13:52, 6 October 2016 (CDT)
- How about only bunching when there's a subscripted part? It's really rough to read. I also really prefer brackets instead of double parentheses [( ... )] vs (( ... )). VANKRASN39 (talk) 14:27, 6 October 2016 (CDT)