LaTeX.org

I had also tried something like you (using \expandafter after reading Appendix C of Kopka & Daly) to delay evaluation/expansion, but was less successful than you.

In the meantime I found two packages where they seem to do exactly this: one is txfonts (package for Times fonts) and the other is ...

In which way would that make typesetting easier? Or isn't that the intention of your question?


This question came up when I was trying to define an upright version for all symbols in the basic Math Letters font (I collected and patched together a set of roman shaped symbols from different fonts ...

Thanks for your reply.
I know that, of course.
The only reason for having chosen the bold example was to serve as an illustration of the problem.

To make things clearer: I do know how to write text and math in boldface, as well as defining/redefining commands.

As explained in the first post ...

thanks for your reply.

That's true for all commands, and that's the way I've been doing it until now.

The reason for wanting to actually join them is that I find it easier (e.g. for debugging) to read the code by having composite commands.

Hi all,
let's say one defines a simple command \boldletter{X} which prints the bold version of its argument (X in this case).

How can one define a shorthand for this command, e.g. \bletX = \boldletter{X} such that it would work for all letters in the alphabet A...Z and a...z - so for instance ...