0

I am trying to output very large (bussproofs) prooftrees, say with hundreds of nodes. An attempt I am trying is by the package preview. By trial and error, I may find a large value to set PreviewBorder (PreviewBbAdjust), and so it seems I succeed to display a large prooftree, see/try my MWE below.

Question is: is there a way to ask latex to calculate the needed value(s), for each given tree?

\documentclass[14pt]{article}
\usepackage{bussproofs}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{latexsym}
\usepackage[active,tightpage]{preview}
\PreviewEnvironment{prooftree}
%\setlength\PreviewBorder{990pt}%
\renewcommand\PreviewBbAdjust{-100pt -100pt 990pt 100pt}
% This is the "centered" symbol
\def\fCenter{{\mbox{\Large$\rightarrow$}}}
\begin{document}
\begin{prooftree}
\Axiom$\Delta\fCenter\Pi$
\Axiom$\Gamma^\prime\fCenter\Delta,A$
\dottedLine
\singleLine
\UnaryInf$\lnot A,\Gamma^\prime \fCenter \Delta$
\UnaryInf$\lnot A,\lnot A,\Gamma^\prime \fCenter \Delta$
\singleLine
\UnaryInf$\Gamma \fCenter \Delta$
\BinaryInf$\Gamma,\Pi,A \fCenter \Delta, \Delta,B$
\Axiom$\Delta\fCenter\Pi$
\Axiom$\Gamma^\prime\fCenter\Delta,A$
\dottedLine
\singleLine
\UnaryInf$\lnot A,\Gamma^\prime \fCenter \Delta$
\UnaryInf$\lnot A,\lnot A,\Gamma^\prime \fCenter \Delta$
\singleLine
\UnaryInf$\Gamma \fCenter \Delta$
\BinaryInf$\Gamma,\Pi,A \fCenter \Delta, \Delta,B$
\BinaryInf$\Gamma,\Pi,A \fCenter \Delta, \Delta B, 001$
\Axiom$\Delta\fCenter\Pi$
\Axiom$\Gamma^\prime\fCenter\Delta,A$
\dottedLine
\singleLine
\UnaryInf$\lnot A,\Gamma^\prime \fCenter \Delta$
\UnaryInf$\lnot A,\lnot A,\Gamma^\prime \fCenter \Delta$
\singleLine
\UnaryInf$\Gamma \fCenter \Delta$
\BinaryInf$\Gamma,\Pi,A \fCenter \Delta, \Delta,B$
\Axiom$\Delta\fCenter\Pi$
\Axiom$\Gamma^\prime\fCenter\Delta,A$
\dottedLine
\singleLine
\UnaryInf$\lnot A,\Gamma^\prime \fCenter \Delta$
\UnaryInf$\lnot A,\lnot A,\Gamma^\prime \fCenter \Delta$
\singleLine
\UnaryInf$\Gamma \fCenter \Delta$
\BinaryInf$\Gamma,\Pi,A \fCenter \Delta, \Delta,B$
\BinaryInf$\Gamma,\Pi,A \fCenter \Delta, \Delta B, 001$
\BinaryInf$\Gamma,\Pi,A \fCenter \Delta, \Delta B, 002$
\Axiom$\Delta\fCenter\Pi$
\Axiom$\Gamma^\prime\fCenter\Delta,A$
\dottedLine
\singleLine
\UnaryInf$\lnot A,\Gamma^\prime \fCenter \Delta$
\UnaryInf$\lnot A,\lnot A,\Gamma^\prime \fCenter \Delta$
\singleLine
\UnaryInf$\Gamma \fCenter \Delta$
\BinaryInf$\Gamma,\Pi,A \fCenter \Delta, \Delta,B$
\Axiom$\Delta\fCenter\Pi$
\Axiom$\Gamma^\prime\fCenter\Delta,A$
\dottedLine
\singleLine
\UnaryInf$\lnot A,\Gamma^\prime \fCenter \Delta$
\UnaryInf$\lnot A,\lnot A,\Gamma^\prime \fCenter \Delta$
\singleLine
\UnaryInf$\Gamma \fCenter \Delta$
\BinaryInf$\Gamma,\Pi,A \fCenter \Delta, \Delta,B$
\BinaryInf$\Gamma,\Pi,A \fCenter \Delta, \Delta B, 001$
\Axiom$\Delta\fCenter\Pi$
\Axiom$\Gamma^\prime\fCenter\Delta,A$
\dottedLine
\singleLine
\UnaryInf$\lnot A,\Gamma^\prime \fCenter \Delta$
\UnaryInf$\lnot A,\lnot A,\Gamma^\prime \fCenter \Delta$
\singleLine
\UnaryInf$\Gamma \fCenter \Delta$
\BinaryInf$\Gamma,\Pi,A \fCenter \Delta, \Delta,B$
\Axiom$\Delta\fCenter\Pi$
\Axiom$\Gamma^\prime\fCenter\Delta,A$
\dottedLine
\singleLine
\UnaryInf$\lnot A,\Gamma^\prime \fCenter \Delta$
\UnaryInf$\lnot A,\lnot A,\Gamma^\prime \fCenter \Delta$
\singleLine
\UnaryInf$\Gamma \fCenter \Delta$
\BinaryInf$\Gamma,\Pi,A \fCenter \Delta, \Delta,B$
\BinaryInf$\Gamma,\Pi,A \fCenter \Delta, \Delta B, 001$
\BinaryInf$\Gamma,\Pi,A \fCenter \Delta, \Delta B, 002$
\BinaryInf$\Gamma,\Pi,A \fCenter \Delta, \Delta B, 003$
\end{prooftree}
\end{document}
mario
  • 761
  • 1
    Is this substantively different from your other question? To put this another way: if somebody provides a satisfactory answer to that question, would people be wasting their time trying to answer this one? Asking this without even referencing your first question suggests that such considerations mean very little to you i.e. all that matters is maximising your chance of an answer; other people's time and effort is neither here nor there. – cfr Jul 01 '18 at 23:34
  • @cfr Clearly I am working on the same general issue. Still, this question asks about a different technical point, and about a different package. So it seems to me it counts as a different question, doesn't it? I edited the headline, hope it clarifies the difference. – mario Jul 02 '18 at 15:28
  • 1
    @cfr I correct myself. I understand now it is a duplicate question. As a matter of fact, I am asking twice how to know, so to speak in advance how large a bussproof tree will be. – mario Jul 02 '18 at 16:00
  • We can reopen it if you do decide it isn't a duplicate. I was assuming that it was the technical issue which you really wanted an answer to, as opposed to needing answers for multiple packages. If you did need them for multiple packages, it would be best to make clear that you need a solution for this package, too, and to link to your other question, so you don't get a bunch of 'use standalone instead' answers. – cfr Jul 02 '18 at 17:14
  • @cfr, I now understand there is a common techy point: to be able to know somehow the size of the bussproofs tree, so to be able to pass a large enough value as a border parameter. It is an issue about neither preview nor standalone. Let this question be a duplicate. – mario Jul 02 '18 at 20:05

0 Answers0