A question about using a \renewcommand to adapt a package

Question

This article is a sub-question of: Cross-referencing on 2 kinds of end-footnotes (separated and with different coloured numbers)

---

Hi,

I am trying to adapt a package called parnotes (which can be called using \usepackage{parnotes}. Its original source code can be downloaded at CTAN here.

The line of code I want to "adapt" (i.e. change when implemented in another .tex-document) lives inside the following piece:

\long\def\PN@parnote@real#1{
   \global\advance\c@PN@t\@ne

    \g@addto@macro\PN@text{

        \global\advance\c@PN@n\@ne
        \parnotemarkfmt{PN@n}\nolinebreak\thinspace#1

            \unless\ifnum\c@PN@n=\c@PN@t
                \parnoteintercmd
            \fi
        }
    \unskip\parnotemarkfmt{PN@t}
}

The only line I want to be change is the last one. I would like it to become:

    \unskip\textsuperscript{\parnotemarkfmt{PN@t}}

I know when this change performs perfect (I tweaked the downloadable source code at CTAN), but I would like to ask you for help, since I don't know how to change this line of code from outside (i.e. from a new .tex-file).

I would think (since I was able to adapt another line of code of the source this way) one would use in the preamble of a new .tex-document:

\makeatletter
\renewcommand{...???...}
\makeatother

Or perhaps someone knows an alternative way using \let ...?

Many thanks in advance.

Answer 1

Here's a minimal example:

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{parnotes}

\begin{document}

\begin{autopn}
Text\parnote{parnote}

Text
\end{autopn}

\end{document}

which outputs

With your proposed change it would become

that's definitely bad, because the exponent is too high (besides being too small, but this is a question of taste).

The “easy” way, with which I produced the example, is

\usepackage{etoolbox}
\makeatletter
\patchcmd{\PN@parnote@real}
  {\parnotemarkfmt{PN@t}}
  {\textsuperscript{\parnotemarkfmt{PN@t}}}
  {}{}
\makeatother

There are many examples of how \patchcmd can be used; see, for instance, Please tutor the usage of patchcmd and xpatch

However, in this case this is the wrong way to go. Indeed, the package provides \parnotemarkfmt exactly for the purpose of formatting the marker in text.

Its definition by the package is

\providecommand{\parnotemarkfmt}[1]{\textsuperscript{\PN@mark@set{#1}}}

(by the way, \newcommand should be used here, but it's of no consequence for the topic at hand). As you see, \textsuperscript is used. For information, \PN@mark@set is, by default, the same as \arabic.

If you want to reduce the size of the exponent, you can simply change the definition of \parnotemarkfmt. If you want a smaller exponent, you can define a \textsmallsuperscript macro based on what \textsuperscript does:

% latex.ltx, line 6017:
\DeclareRobustCommand*\textsuperscript[1]{%
  \@textsuperscript{\selectfont#1}}
\def\@textsuperscript#1{%
  {\m@th\ensuremath{^{\mbox{\fontsize\sf@size\z@#1}}}}}

So we can do

\DeclareRobustCommand*\textsmallsuperscript[1]{%
  \vincent@textsmallsuperscript{\selectfont#1}}
\def\vincent@textsmallsuperscript#1{%
  {\m@th\ensuremath{^{\mbox{\fontsize\ssf@size\z@#1}}}}}

Using a prefix before the “internal macro marker” @ is good practice.

Complete example:

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{parnotes}

\makeatletter
\DeclareRobustCommand*\textsmallsuperscript[1]{%
  \vincent@textsmallsuperscript{\selectfont#1}}
\def\vincent@textsmallsuperscript#1{%
  {\m@th\ensuremath{^{\mbox{\fontsize\ssf@size\z@#1}}}}}% <--- use scriptscriptsize

\renewcommand{\parnotemarkfmt}[1]{\textsmallsuperscript{\PN@mark@set{#1}}}
\makeatother

\begin{document}

\begin{autopn}
Text\parnote{parnote}

Text
\end{autopn}

\end{document}