Subscripts in \sup not on desired position

Question

For

\sup_{\varrho_{i}, \forall i}

I get

What should I change such that I have this subscript exactly under sup?

If you're using $\sup...$ , then use $\displaystyle\sup...$ instead. — Werner, Jan 27 '22 at 23:04
You might use \sup\limits_{\varrho_i,\forall i} but you'll spoil the distances between base lines. — egreg, Jan 27 '22 at 23:07
For a similar situation, see https://tex.stackexchange.com/q/205125/4427 and answers thereon. — egreg, Jan 28 '22 at 09:12

score 3 · Accepted Answer · answered Feb 28 '22 at 00:45

To have subscripts below \sup at in-line math gives ugly result:

so I strongly discourage to use it on such a way. At display math is different story. There this is standard way to write \sup:

documentclass{article}
\usepackage{amsmath}    % not needed for reproducing your problem
\usepackage{lipsum}
\begin{document}
I get $\sup\limits_{\varrho_{i}, \forall i}$ \lipsum[11]
\begin{equation}
\sup\limits_{\varrho_{i}, \forall i}
\end{equation}
\end{document}

Subscripts in \sup not on desired position

1 Answers1