3

(Note: See EDIT below that rules out both stackengine and standalone as the culprit)

Input:

\documentclass{standalone}
\usepackage{unicode-math}
\usepackage{stackengine}\stackMath
\begin{document}
\(\bigl[
,
  \mathchoice%
  {}%
  {}%
  {}%
  {\stackunder{\scriptscriptstyle a}{}}
\bigr]\)
\end{document}

We expect the output [,] with same-size vertically aligned brackets. However, the output is as follows:

output when running xelatex

The brackets have different sizes and irregular vertical placement, which is wrong: they should have the same size and be vertically aligned. Using \Big, \bigg, etc. instead of \big produces similarly erroneous output. Removing \usepackage{unicode-math}, or, \scriptscriptsize, or, a, or \stackunder doesn't trigger the bug any more. The compilation was done with the following software versions:

  • XeTeX, Version 3.14159265-2.6-0.99996 (TeX Live 2016/Debian) (preloaded format=xelatex 2017.4.2)
  • LaTeX2e <2017/01/01> patch level 3
  • standalone 2015/07/15 v1.2 (NOT responsible)
  • unicode-math 2015/09/24 v0.8c
  • stackengine 2016/10/04 v4.00 (NOT responsible)

Who is the culprit and what to do?


EDIT by S.B. Segletes

The stackengine package is shown not to be the culprit, by the following MWE, which produces the identical wrong result without the use of stackengine. Changing standalone to article also does not correct the issue.

\documentclass{standalone}
\usepackage{unicode-math}
\begin{document}
\(\bigl[
,
  \mathchoice%
  {}%
  {}%
  {}%
  {\hbox{$\scriptscriptstyle a$}}
\bigr]\)
\end{document}

1 Answers1

1

This used to be an issue with XeTeX up to version 3.14159265-2.6-0.99996 (the one in TeX Live 2016). It doesn't happen with XeTeX 3.14159265-2.6-0.99998 (included in TeX Live 2017).

This is the output of the original code (including stackengine) with the new release

enter image description here

This is the output of the reduced code with the new release

enter image description here

egreg
  • 1,121,712