[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: MF hackery (arrow kit)
- To: email@example.com
- Subject: Re: MF hackery (arrow kit)
- From: Matthias Clasen <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Tue, 4 Nov 1997 14:46:51 +0100
- Cc: email@example.com
> > * Made `all bigops should have small counterparts, but not necessarily
> > vice versa' true (also from the archives).
> Do we really need this? We already have slots for small integrals.
> Do you also want small \sum and \prod? Why nout use \Sigma and \Pi?
Well, I should have said this more clearly: They should have a binop
counterpart. So the `small \sum' is already there, its the `+'.