I have a question specific to LaTeXiT 2.8.1 (pierre chachatelier, www.chachatelier.fr):
When I use LaTeXiT to compile (use in text or align mode; this is a minimal working example since LaTexiT adds the standard document wrapper itself.)
\begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|l|l|l|l|l|l|l|l|l|l|l|l|l|l|l|l|l|l|}
\hline
0.12048&0.40072&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0\\\hline
-1.1481&0.73661&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0\\\hline
0&0&1.8117&-0.73617&-0.94101&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0\\\hline
0&0&1.1531&-0.58694&-1.0686&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0\\\hline
0&0&-1.1809e-16&1.0385&0.66551&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0\\\hline
0&0&0&0&0&-0.19095&0.51543&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0\\\hline
0&0&0&0&0&-0.55884&1.1195&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0\\\hline
0&0&0&0&0&0&0&-0.10547&1.016&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0\\\hline
0&0&0&0&0&0&0&-0.0023264&-0.15124&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0\\\hline
0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0.087568&0.28791&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0\\\hline
0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&-1.1187&0.96495&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0\\\hline
0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0&0.1361&0.40732&0.44114&0&0&0&0&0&0&0\\\hline
\end{tabular}
I get:
Which is cut off on the right side (the actual picture is cut off, its not like I did not scale or zoom correctly.)
Does anybody have a suggestions for what goes wrong and how it can be fixed?
Thanks everybody!
LaTeXiT 2.8.1; GPL Ghostscript 9.19; pdfTeX, Version 3.14159265-2.6-1.40.16 (TeX Live 2015); macOS Sierra 10.12.1;
Wrapper to run the example outside of LaTexiT:
\documentclass{article}
\begin{document}
(...)
\end{document}
The Solution
\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{graphicx}
\begin{document}
\resizebox{\textwidth}{!}{
(...)
}
\end{document}
Scales the table down to the available space. Works also in LaTeXiT.


Btw when I use a very small font, the width reduces but it still fails...
– Felix Feb 07 '17 at 09:45-1.1809e-16with0, right? – Mico Feb 07 '17 at 09:46-1.6e-19 Coloumb, not0, as a counter - example ;-) – Feb 07 '17 at 09:48@Christian: important is the distance of largest to smallest (non-zero) element in the matrix. Since it is 16 decades away here, its 0 for all practical purposes. Let's not discuss this further ;)
– Felix Feb 07 '17 at 09:49p{3cm}to limit the width, but not for single numbers. – Fran Feb 07 '17 at 09:49tabular*,tabularxandtabularyenvironments. – Fran Feb 07 '17 at 09:53-1.2e-16is not a real (pun intended) number but a failure to apply sensible rounding criteria. Hopefully, the OP will weigh in and explain what the numbers actually represent. – Mico Feb 07 '17 at 15:46