Macros dv and pdv eat the subsequent parenthesis argument












3















The physics package has the macros dv and pdv which are great but I have a small problem with them.



If an argument with parenthesis included right after them they eat the whole argument. If there is a space in between the argument everything works fine but I want to prevent this happening all together. I checked the documentation but couldn't find a solution. So an example would be



documentclass{article}
usepackage{physics}

begin{document}

[dv{x}{t}(y^2-5) qquad dv{x}{t} (y^2-5) qquad dv{x}{t} ]

end{document}




I want the output of the equation on the left to be the same as the middle one.










share|improve this question




















  • 1





    I cannot recommend using the physics package. See e.g. this post: tex.stackexchange.com/questions/453274

    – Henri Menke
    2 days ago













  • @HenriMenke Thanks for your answer below and recommendation. I didn't know anything about the poor practices that were done in physics package. I'll try to switch over to amsmath as you suggested, especially after seeing your remarks about how ev is defined

    – Calvin Kent
    2 days ago
















3















The physics package has the macros dv and pdv which are great but I have a small problem with them.



If an argument with parenthesis included right after them they eat the whole argument. If there is a space in between the argument everything works fine but I want to prevent this happening all together. I checked the documentation but couldn't find a solution. So an example would be



documentclass{article}
usepackage{physics}

begin{document}

[dv{x}{t}(y^2-5) qquad dv{x}{t} (y^2-5) qquad dv{x}{t} ]

end{document}




I want the output of the equation on the left to be the same as the middle one.










share|improve this question




















  • 1





    I cannot recommend using the physics package. See e.g. this post: tex.stackexchange.com/questions/453274

    – Henri Menke
    2 days ago













  • @HenriMenke Thanks for your answer below and recommendation. I didn't know anything about the poor practices that were done in physics package. I'll try to switch over to amsmath as you suggested, especially after seeing your remarks about how ev is defined

    – Calvin Kent
    2 days ago














3












3








3








The physics package has the macros dv and pdv which are great but I have a small problem with them.



If an argument with parenthesis included right after them they eat the whole argument. If there is a space in between the argument everything works fine but I want to prevent this happening all together. I checked the documentation but couldn't find a solution. So an example would be



documentclass{article}
usepackage{physics}

begin{document}

[dv{x}{t}(y^2-5) qquad dv{x}{t} (y^2-5) qquad dv{x}{t} ]

end{document}




I want the output of the equation on the left to be the same as the middle one.










share|improve this question
















The physics package has the macros dv and pdv which are great but I have a small problem with them.



If an argument with parenthesis included right after them they eat the whole argument. If there is a space in between the argument everything works fine but I want to prevent this happening all together. I checked the documentation but couldn't find a solution. So an example would be



documentclass{article}
usepackage{physics}

begin{document}

[dv{x}{t}(y^2-5) qquad dv{x}{t} (y^2-5) qquad dv{x}{t} ]

end{document}




I want the output of the equation on the left to be the same as the middle one.







brackets physics






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 2 days ago









Bernard

167k770195




167k770195










asked 2 days ago









Calvin KentCalvin Kent

807




807








  • 1





    I cannot recommend using the physics package. See e.g. this post: tex.stackexchange.com/questions/453274

    – Henri Menke
    2 days ago













  • @HenriMenke Thanks for your answer below and recommendation. I didn't know anything about the poor practices that were done in physics package. I'll try to switch over to amsmath as you suggested, especially after seeing your remarks about how ev is defined

    – Calvin Kent
    2 days ago














  • 1





    I cannot recommend using the physics package. See e.g. this post: tex.stackexchange.com/questions/453274

    – Henri Menke
    2 days ago













  • @HenriMenke Thanks for your answer below and recommendation. I didn't know anything about the poor practices that were done in physics package. I'll try to switch over to amsmath as you suggested, especially after seeing your remarks about how ev is defined

    – Calvin Kent
    2 days ago








1




1





I cannot recommend using the physics package. See e.g. this post: tex.stackexchange.com/questions/453274

– Henri Menke
2 days ago







I cannot recommend using the physics package. See e.g. this post: tex.stackexchange.com/questions/453274

– Henri Menke
2 days ago















@HenriMenke Thanks for your answer below and recommendation. I didn't know anything about the poor practices that were done in physics package. I'll try to switch over to amsmath as you suggested, especially after seeing your remarks about how ev is defined

– Calvin Kent
2 days ago





@HenriMenke Thanks for your answer below and recommendation. I didn't know anything about the poor practices that were done in physics package. I'll try to switch over to amsmath as you suggested, especially after seeing your remarks about how ev is defined

– Calvin Kent
2 days ago










3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















4














That's because dv (which is a shorthand for derivative) is defined as



DeclareDocumentCommandderivative{ s o m g d() }
{ % Total derivative
% s: star for flatfrac flat derivative
% o: optional n for nth derivative
% m: mandatory (x in df/dx)
% g: optional (f in df/dx)
% d: long-form d/dx(...)


Even if the optional g-type argument is given (as in your case) the command will scan further for an optional delimited d-type argument which is delimited by ( and ) (maybe not the best choice in a mathematical context). To circumvent this you have to redefine derivative to always flush #5 if it is present.



documentclass{article}
usepackage{physics}

DeclareDocumentCommandderivative{ s o m g d() }
{ % Total derivative
% s: star for flatfrac flat derivative
% o: optional n for nth derivative
% m: mandatory (x in df/dx)
% g: optional (f in df/dx)
% d: long-form d/dx(...)
IfBooleanTF{#1}
{letfractypeflatfrac}
{letfractypefrac}
IfNoValueTF{#4}
{
IfNoValueTF{#5}
{fractype{diffd IfNoValueTF{#2}{}{^{#2}}}{diffd #3IfNoValueTF{#2}{}{^{#2}}}}
{fractype{diffd IfNoValueTF{#2}{}{^{#2}}}{diffd #3IfNoValueTF{#2}{}{^{#2}}} argopen(#5argclose)}
}
{fractype{diffd IfNoValueTF{#2}{}{^{#2}} #3}{diffd #4IfNoValueTF{#2}{}{^{#2}}}IfValueT{#5}{(#5)}}
}

begin{document}

[dv{x}{t}(y^2-5) qquad dv{x}{t} (y^2-5) qquad dv{x}{t} ]

end{document}


enter image description here



At the same time I'd like to note that the physics package does not really help me writing physics formulae and I'm usually much better off typing the stuff by hand using the amsmath macros.






share|improve this answer



















  • 1





    partialderivative and therefore pdv will probably have the same problem.

    – Henri Menke
    2 days ago



















2














The package physics abuses the possibilities afforded by xparse to define commands having very weird syntax.



For instance, if you want to typeset the standard frac{dx}{dt}, you have to type



dv{x}{t}


If you want instead frac{d}{dt}(f(t)) you type



dv{t}(f(t))


which is where the syntax is weird: the variable you differentiate with respect to is no longer the second mandatory argument, but the first and a mandatory argument is missing altogether.



Of course this is achieved by actually making the second braced argument optional, which breaks all standard LaTeX conventions.



It is very counterintuitive having the independent variable first when the “long form” is desired and second for the “short (Leibniz) form”.



How can you do? My best advice is to keep at arm's length from physics. It seems to provide many bells and whistles for typesetting math, but this is at the expense of syntax clarity.



If you are tied to the package, simply add a no-op; a simple one in this context is /:



documentclass{article}
usepackage{physics}

begin{document}

[
dv{x}{t}/(y^2-5) qquad dv{x}{t}/ (y^2-5) qquad dv{x}{t}
]

end{document}


enter image description here






share|improve this answer































    1














    Renewing the commands in this way probably does it:



    documentclass{article}
    usepackage{physics}
    renewcommanddv[2]{derivative{#1}{#2}{}}
    renewcommandpdv[3]{partialderivative{#1}{#2}{#3}{}}
    begin{document}

    [dv{x}{t}(y^2-5) qquad dv{x}{t} (y^2-5) qquad dv{x}{t} ]

    [pdv{x}{t}{z}(y^2-5) qquad pdv{x}{t}{z} (y^2-5) qquad pdv{x}{t}{z} ]

    end{document}


    like this:



    enter image description here






    share|improve this answer
























    • This breaks the starred variants.

      – Henri Menke
      2 days ago











    Your Answer








    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "85"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: false,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: null,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });














    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2ftex.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f470819%2fmacros-dv-and-pdv-eat-the-subsequent-parenthesis-argument%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    3 Answers
    3






    active

    oldest

    votes








    3 Answers
    3






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    4














    That's because dv (which is a shorthand for derivative) is defined as



    DeclareDocumentCommandderivative{ s o m g d() }
    { % Total derivative
    % s: star for flatfrac flat derivative
    % o: optional n for nth derivative
    % m: mandatory (x in df/dx)
    % g: optional (f in df/dx)
    % d: long-form d/dx(...)


    Even if the optional g-type argument is given (as in your case) the command will scan further for an optional delimited d-type argument which is delimited by ( and ) (maybe not the best choice in a mathematical context). To circumvent this you have to redefine derivative to always flush #5 if it is present.



    documentclass{article}
    usepackage{physics}

    DeclareDocumentCommandderivative{ s o m g d() }
    { % Total derivative
    % s: star for flatfrac flat derivative
    % o: optional n for nth derivative
    % m: mandatory (x in df/dx)
    % g: optional (f in df/dx)
    % d: long-form d/dx(...)
    IfBooleanTF{#1}
    {letfractypeflatfrac}
    {letfractypefrac}
    IfNoValueTF{#4}
    {
    IfNoValueTF{#5}
    {fractype{diffd IfNoValueTF{#2}{}{^{#2}}}{diffd #3IfNoValueTF{#2}{}{^{#2}}}}
    {fractype{diffd IfNoValueTF{#2}{}{^{#2}}}{diffd #3IfNoValueTF{#2}{}{^{#2}}} argopen(#5argclose)}
    }
    {fractype{diffd IfNoValueTF{#2}{}{^{#2}} #3}{diffd #4IfNoValueTF{#2}{}{^{#2}}}IfValueT{#5}{(#5)}}
    }

    begin{document}

    [dv{x}{t}(y^2-5) qquad dv{x}{t} (y^2-5) qquad dv{x}{t} ]

    end{document}


    enter image description here



    At the same time I'd like to note that the physics package does not really help me writing physics formulae and I'm usually much better off typing the stuff by hand using the amsmath macros.






    share|improve this answer



















    • 1





      partialderivative and therefore pdv will probably have the same problem.

      – Henri Menke
      2 days ago
















    4














    That's because dv (which is a shorthand for derivative) is defined as



    DeclareDocumentCommandderivative{ s o m g d() }
    { % Total derivative
    % s: star for flatfrac flat derivative
    % o: optional n for nth derivative
    % m: mandatory (x in df/dx)
    % g: optional (f in df/dx)
    % d: long-form d/dx(...)


    Even if the optional g-type argument is given (as in your case) the command will scan further for an optional delimited d-type argument which is delimited by ( and ) (maybe not the best choice in a mathematical context). To circumvent this you have to redefine derivative to always flush #5 if it is present.



    documentclass{article}
    usepackage{physics}

    DeclareDocumentCommandderivative{ s o m g d() }
    { % Total derivative
    % s: star for flatfrac flat derivative
    % o: optional n for nth derivative
    % m: mandatory (x in df/dx)
    % g: optional (f in df/dx)
    % d: long-form d/dx(...)
    IfBooleanTF{#1}
    {letfractypeflatfrac}
    {letfractypefrac}
    IfNoValueTF{#4}
    {
    IfNoValueTF{#5}
    {fractype{diffd IfNoValueTF{#2}{}{^{#2}}}{diffd #3IfNoValueTF{#2}{}{^{#2}}}}
    {fractype{diffd IfNoValueTF{#2}{}{^{#2}}}{diffd #3IfNoValueTF{#2}{}{^{#2}}} argopen(#5argclose)}
    }
    {fractype{diffd IfNoValueTF{#2}{}{^{#2}} #3}{diffd #4IfNoValueTF{#2}{}{^{#2}}}IfValueT{#5}{(#5)}}
    }

    begin{document}

    [dv{x}{t}(y^2-5) qquad dv{x}{t} (y^2-5) qquad dv{x}{t} ]

    end{document}


    enter image description here



    At the same time I'd like to note that the physics package does not really help me writing physics formulae and I'm usually much better off typing the stuff by hand using the amsmath macros.






    share|improve this answer



















    • 1





      partialderivative and therefore pdv will probably have the same problem.

      – Henri Menke
      2 days ago














    4












    4








    4







    That's because dv (which is a shorthand for derivative) is defined as



    DeclareDocumentCommandderivative{ s o m g d() }
    { % Total derivative
    % s: star for flatfrac flat derivative
    % o: optional n for nth derivative
    % m: mandatory (x in df/dx)
    % g: optional (f in df/dx)
    % d: long-form d/dx(...)


    Even if the optional g-type argument is given (as in your case) the command will scan further for an optional delimited d-type argument which is delimited by ( and ) (maybe not the best choice in a mathematical context). To circumvent this you have to redefine derivative to always flush #5 if it is present.



    documentclass{article}
    usepackage{physics}

    DeclareDocumentCommandderivative{ s o m g d() }
    { % Total derivative
    % s: star for flatfrac flat derivative
    % o: optional n for nth derivative
    % m: mandatory (x in df/dx)
    % g: optional (f in df/dx)
    % d: long-form d/dx(...)
    IfBooleanTF{#1}
    {letfractypeflatfrac}
    {letfractypefrac}
    IfNoValueTF{#4}
    {
    IfNoValueTF{#5}
    {fractype{diffd IfNoValueTF{#2}{}{^{#2}}}{diffd #3IfNoValueTF{#2}{}{^{#2}}}}
    {fractype{diffd IfNoValueTF{#2}{}{^{#2}}}{diffd #3IfNoValueTF{#2}{}{^{#2}}} argopen(#5argclose)}
    }
    {fractype{diffd IfNoValueTF{#2}{}{^{#2}} #3}{diffd #4IfNoValueTF{#2}{}{^{#2}}}IfValueT{#5}{(#5)}}
    }

    begin{document}

    [dv{x}{t}(y^2-5) qquad dv{x}{t} (y^2-5) qquad dv{x}{t} ]

    end{document}


    enter image description here



    At the same time I'd like to note that the physics package does not really help me writing physics formulae and I'm usually much better off typing the stuff by hand using the amsmath macros.






    share|improve this answer













    That's because dv (which is a shorthand for derivative) is defined as



    DeclareDocumentCommandderivative{ s o m g d() }
    { % Total derivative
    % s: star for flatfrac flat derivative
    % o: optional n for nth derivative
    % m: mandatory (x in df/dx)
    % g: optional (f in df/dx)
    % d: long-form d/dx(...)


    Even if the optional g-type argument is given (as in your case) the command will scan further for an optional delimited d-type argument which is delimited by ( and ) (maybe not the best choice in a mathematical context). To circumvent this you have to redefine derivative to always flush #5 if it is present.



    documentclass{article}
    usepackage{physics}

    DeclareDocumentCommandderivative{ s o m g d() }
    { % Total derivative
    % s: star for flatfrac flat derivative
    % o: optional n for nth derivative
    % m: mandatory (x in df/dx)
    % g: optional (f in df/dx)
    % d: long-form d/dx(...)
    IfBooleanTF{#1}
    {letfractypeflatfrac}
    {letfractypefrac}
    IfNoValueTF{#4}
    {
    IfNoValueTF{#5}
    {fractype{diffd IfNoValueTF{#2}{}{^{#2}}}{diffd #3IfNoValueTF{#2}{}{^{#2}}}}
    {fractype{diffd IfNoValueTF{#2}{}{^{#2}}}{diffd #3IfNoValueTF{#2}{}{^{#2}}} argopen(#5argclose)}
    }
    {fractype{diffd IfNoValueTF{#2}{}{^{#2}} #3}{diffd #4IfNoValueTF{#2}{}{^{#2}}}IfValueT{#5}{(#5)}}
    }

    begin{document}

    [dv{x}{t}(y^2-5) qquad dv{x}{t} (y^2-5) qquad dv{x}{t} ]

    end{document}


    enter image description here



    At the same time I'd like to note that the physics package does not really help me writing physics formulae and I'm usually much better off typing the stuff by hand using the amsmath macros.







    share|improve this answer












    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer










    answered 2 days ago









    Henri MenkeHenri Menke

    71.4k8158266




    71.4k8158266








    • 1





      partialderivative and therefore pdv will probably have the same problem.

      – Henri Menke
      2 days ago














    • 1





      partialderivative and therefore pdv will probably have the same problem.

      – Henri Menke
      2 days ago








    1




    1





    partialderivative and therefore pdv will probably have the same problem.

    – Henri Menke
    2 days ago





    partialderivative and therefore pdv will probably have the same problem.

    – Henri Menke
    2 days ago











    2














    The package physics abuses the possibilities afforded by xparse to define commands having very weird syntax.



    For instance, if you want to typeset the standard frac{dx}{dt}, you have to type



    dv{x}{t}


    If you want instead frac{d}{dt}(f(t)) you type



    dv{t}(f(t))


    which is where the syntax is weird: the variable you differentiate with respect to is no longer the second mandatory argument, but the first and a mandatory argument is missing altogether.



    Of course this is achieved by actually making the second braced argument optional, which breaks all standard LaTeX conventions.



    It is very counterintuitive having the independent variable first when the “long form” is desired and second for the “short (Leibniz) form”.



    How can you do? My best advice is to keep at arm's length from physics. It seems to provide many bells and whistles for typesetting math, but this is at the expense of syntax clarity.



    If you are tied to the package, simply add a no-op; a simple one in this context is /:



    documentclass{article}
    usepackage{physics}

    begin{document}

    [
    dv{x}{t}/(y^2-5) qquad dv{x}{t}/ (y^2-5) qquad dv{x}{t}
    ]

    end{document}


    enter image description here






    share|improve this answer




























      2














      The package physics abuses the possibilities afforded by xparse to define commands having very weird syntax.



      For instance, if you want to typeset the standard frac{dx}{dt}, you have to type



      dv{x}{t}


      If you want instead frac{d}{dt}(f(t)) you type



      dv{t}(f(t))


      which is where the syntax is weird: the variable you differentiate with respect to is no longer the second mandatory argument, but the first and a mandatory argument is missing altogether.



      Of course this is achieved by actually making the second braced argument optional, which breaks all standard LaTeX conventions.



      It is very counterintuitive having the independent variable first when the “long form” is desired and second for the “short (Leibniz) form”.



      How can you do? My best advice is to keep at arm's length from physics. It seems to provide many bells and whistles for typesetting math, but this is at the expense of syntax clarity.



      If you are tied to the package, simply add a no-op; a simple one in this context is /:



      documentclass{article}
      usepackage{physics}

      begin{document}

      [
      dv{x}{t}/(y^2-5) qquad dv{x}{t}/ (y^2-5) qquad dv{x}{t}
      ]

      end{document}


      enter image description here






      share|improve this answer


























        2












        2








        2







        The package physics abuses the possibilities afforded by xparse to define commands having very weird syntax.



        For instance, if you want to typeset the standard frac{dx}{dt}, you have to type



        dv{x}{t}


        If you want instead frac{d}{dt}(f(t)) you type



        dv{t}(f(t))


        which is where the syntax is weird: the variable you differentiate with respect to is no longer the second mandatory argument, but the first and a mandatory argument is missing altogether.



        Of course this is achieved by actually making the second braced argument optional, which breaks all standard LaTeX conventions.



        It is very counterintuitive having the independent variable first when the “long form” is desired and second for the “short (Leibniz) form”.



        How can you do? My best advice is to keep at arm's length from physics. It seems to provide many bells and whistles for typesetting math, but this is at the expense of syntax clarity.



        If you are tied to the package, simply add a no-op; a simple one in this context is /:



        documentclass{article}
        usepackage{physics}

        begin{document}

        [
        dv{x}{t}/(y^2-5) qquad dv{x}{t}/ (y^2-5) qquad dv{x}{t}
        ]

        end{document}


        enter image description here






        share|improve this answer













        The package physics abuses the possibilities afforded by xparse to define commands having very weird syntax.



        For instance, if you want to typeset the standard frac{dx}{dt}, you have to type



        dv{x}{t}


        If you want instead frac{d}{dt}(f(t)) you type



        dv{t}(f(t))


        which is where the syntax is weird: the variable you differentiate with respect to is no longer the second mandatory argument, but the first and a mandatory argument is missing altogether.



        Of course this is achieved by actually making the second braced argument optional, which breaks all standard LaTeX conventions.



        It is very counterintuitive having the independent variable first when the “long form” is desired and second for the “short (Leibniz) form”.



        How can you do? My best advice is to keep at arm's length from physics. It seems to provide many bells and whistles for typesetting math, but this is at the expense of syntax clarity.



        If you are tied to the package, simply add a no-op; a simple one in this context is /:



        documentclass{article}
        usepackage{physics}

        begin{document}

        [
        dv{x}{t}/(y^2-5) qquad dv{x}{t}/ (y^2-5) qquad dv{x}{t}
        ]

        end{document}


        enter image description here







        share|improve this answer












        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer










        answered 2 days ago









        egregegreg

        714k8618963184




        714k8618963184























            1














            Renewing the commands in this way probably does it:



            documentclass{article}
            usepackage{physics}
            renewcommanddv[2]{derivative{#1}{#2}{}}
            renewcommandpdv[3]{partialderivative{#1}{#2}{#3}{}}
            begin{document}

            [dv{x}{t}(y^2-5) qquad dv{x}{t} (y^2-5) qquad dv{x}{t} ]

            [pdv{x}{t}{z}(y^2-5) qquad pdv{x}{t}{z} (y^2-5) qquad pdv{x}{t}{z} ]

            end{document}


            like this:



            enter image description here






            share|improve this answer
























            • This breaks the starred variants.

              – Henri Menke
              2 days ago
















            1














            Renewing the commands in this way probably does it:



            documentclass{article}
            usepackage{physics}
            renewcommanddv[2]{derivative{#1}{#2}{}}
            renewcommandpdv[3]{partialderivative{#1}{#2}{#3}{}}
            begin{document}

            [dv{x}{t}(y^2-5) qquad dv{x}{t} (y^2-5) qquad dv{x}{t} ]

            [pdv{x}{t}{z}(y^2-5) qquad pdv{x}{t}{z} (y^2-5) qquad pdv{x}{t}{z} ]

            end{document}


            like this:



            enter image description here






            share|improve this answer
























            • This breaks the starred variants.

              – Henri Menke
              2 days ago














            1












            1








            1







            Renewing the commands in this way probably does it:



            documentclass{article}
            usepackage{physics}
            renewcommanddv[2]{derivative{#1}{#2}{}}
            renewcommandpdv[3]{partialderivative{#1}{#2}{#3}{}}
            begin{document}

            [dv{x}{t}(y^2-5) qquad dv{x}{t} (y^2-5) qquad dv{x}{t} ]

            [pdv{x}{t}{z}(y^2-5) qquad pdv{x}{t}{z} (y^2-5) qquad pdv{x}{t}{z} ]

            end{document}


            like this:



            enter image description here






            share|improve this answer













            Renewing the commands in this way probably does it:



            documentclass{article}
            usepackage{physics}
            renewcommanddv[2]{derivative{#1}{#2}{}}
            renewcommandpdv[3]{partialderivative{#1}{#2}{#3}{}}
            begin{document}

            [dv{x}{t}(y^2-5) qquad dv{x}{t} (y^2-5) qquad dv{x}{t} ]

            [pdv{x}{t}{z}(y^2-5) qquad pdv{x}{t}{z} (y^2-5) qquad pdv{x}{t}{z} ]

            end{document}


            like this:



            enter image description here







            share|improve this answer












            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer










            answered 2 days ago









            Partha D.Partha D.

            52316




            52316













            • This breaks the starred variants.

              – Henri Menke
              2 days ago



















            • This breaks the starred variants.

              – Henri Menke
              2 days ago

















            This breaks the starred variants.

            – Henri Menke
            2 days ago





            This breaks the starred variants.

            – Henri Menke
            2 days ago


















            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to TeX - LaTeX Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2ftex.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f470819%2fmacros-dv-and-pdv-eat-the-subsequent-parenthesis-argument%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            If I really need a card on my start hand, how many mulligans make sense? [duplicate]

            Alcedinidae

            Can an atomic nucleus contain both particles and antiparticles? [duplicate]