On Sat, 8 Feb 2020 09:56:18 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Sun, Feb 09, 2020 at 12:46:33AM +0900, Akira Yokosawa wrote: >> On Sat, 8 Feb 2020 07:18:43 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: >>> On Sat, Feb 08, 2020 at 11:44:13PM +0900, Akira Yokosawa wrote: >>>> On Sat, 8 Feb 2020 05:03:58 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: >>>>> On Sat, Feb 08, 2020 at 09:03:10PM +0900, Akira Yokosawa wrote: >>>>>> >From 66df1c9aaaefb2ef5ccfd0c23837b33218a24f30 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >>>>>> From: Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@xxxxxxxxx> >>>>>> Date: Sat, 8 Feb 2020 08:29:08 +0900 >>>>>> Subject: [PATCH] SMPdesign: Fix meaningless consecutive blank pages >>>>>> >>>>>> In the introduction of Dining Philosophers, there is two-page >>>>>> "think about it" gap before presenting an answer. >>>>>> >>>>>> Let's see what we need for print editions. >>>>>> >>>>>> When the question is on an odd page, the answer can be on the next page >>>>>> (the other side of the question's page). >>>>>> When the question is on an even page, the answer should be on the >>>>>> next even page to prevent it from being spotted too early. >>>>>> >>>>>> For electronic editions, there needs to be a gap of at least one >>>>>> page regardless of the question's position. >>>>>> >>>>>> As \cleardoublepage changes its behavior depending on whether it is >>>>>> on an odd page (one blank page) or on an even page (nothing), it >>>>>> can not cover the requirement for electronic editions. >>>>>> >>>>>> For our purpose, the sequence of \clearpage, "((Intentional blank page)", >>>>>> and another \clearpage should suffice. >>>>>> >>>>>> Reported-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxx> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Akira Yokosawa <akiyks@xxxxxxxxx> >>>>> >>>>> I have queued this, thank you! >>>>> >>>>> It works as desired with the current setup because the discussion and the >>>>> reveal both end up on even pages. You can check this using the "evince" >>>>> PDF viewer by putting it into two-page mode (apologies for not saying >>>>> so earlier, but I just now remembered myself). >>>>> >>>>> Wasting the single page isn't a disaster, as you say, but could the >>>>> trick shown here avoid even that? >>>>> >>>>> https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/6143/if-then-else-for-odd-page-even-page >>>>> >>>>> I tried this (but leaving out the recommended \strictpagecheck, which >>>>> might mean that there could be errors when this occurs near the beginning >>>>> of a page?) and it seems to handle both cases. Please see below for a >>>>> patchlet on top of your patch. >>>> >>>> I've not tested it yet, but I think this trick should be enabled only >>>> for print editions. >>>> I'm wondering what is the right option to distinguish print editions >>>> from electronic editions. >>>> >>>> One way would be to update autodate.sh and define a boolean as true >>>> in autodate.tex when you have a tag of "Edition.nP". >>>> >>>> Does this sound reasonable to you? >>> >>> It would, except that people really do print non-print editions and >>> sometimes they print releases or even random points in the git history. >>> So I do not believe that we should distinguish. >> >> For e-readers, this trick would present Figure 6.4 just next to the >> question in contiguous display mode if the question lands on an even page, >> which is not ideal for first-time readers. >> >> So I don't like to enable this trick all the time. >> >> Or, how about enabling it for 2c layouts only, which most people would >> choose to print out. >> >> Another completely different approach would be to put the answer part >> and Figure 6.4 into an Answer to a Quick Quiz. >> Then we wouldn't need to play with \clearpage commands. >> >> Thoughts? > > You know, this might well be the best approach, the additional quick > quizzes notwithstanding. Let me give it some thought, maybe I should > just have a list of answers. Looking forward to seeing how it goes! > >>> But if there is ever a reliable way to produce an ereader format, then >>> agreed, we would want to distinguish. Or if we could figure out that >>> the reader was reading it on a smartphone. >>> >>> Or am I missing a trick here? >> >> It sounds like we are talking about something different, aren't we? ;-) > > Which can sometimes be quite productive. Sometimes. ;-) Yeah, sometimes. In the meantime, I'm submitting a couple of updates regarding to epigraph.sty. Thanks, Akira > > Thanx, Paul > >> Thanks, Akira >> >>> >>> Thanx, Paul >>> >>>> Thanks, Akira >>>> >>>>> >>>>> If this really works, could you please fold it into your patch with any >>>>> needed adjustments? If it is broken in some way, well, I do have your >>>>> existing patch which does represent a much-appreciated improvement! >>>>> >>>>> Thanx, Paul >>>>> >>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/SMPdesign/partexercises.tex b/SMPdesign/partexercises.tex >>>>> index 4ceaefe..82de2b9 100644 >>>>> --- a/SMPdesign/partexercises.tex >>>>> +++ b/SMPdesign/partexercises.tex >>>>> @@ -84,6 +84,8 @@ there will be five forks available to four philosophers. >>>>> At least one of these four will have two forks, and will thus be able >>>>> to eat. >>>>> >>>>> +\clearpage // Comment out to see the other option. And move it around. >>>>> + >>>>> This general technique of numbering resources and acquiring them in >>>>> numerical order is heavily used as a deadlock-prevention technique. >>>>> However, it is easy to imagine a sequence of events that will result >>>>> @@ -107,8 +109,12 @@ philosophers to eat concurrently. >>>>> Please think about ways of partitioning the Dining Philosophers Problem >>>>> before reading further. >>>>> >>>>> +\checkoddpage >>>>> +\ifoddpage >>>>> +\else >>>>> \clearpage >>>>> (Intentional blank page) >>>>> +\fi >>>>> \clearpage >>>>> >>>>> \begin{figure}[tb] >>>>>
