# Way to make \spec a command

I hope this hasn't been previously asked. There are certain symbols that are used very, very often on math.se for which there isn't a preprogrammed TeX command for. The ones that jump immediately to mind are $\text{Spec}$, $\text{tr.deg}$ and $\text{Hom}$. Is there any way to make these widely used symbols into standard TeX so we don't have to type \text{} every time?

• I think that the topic of global macros have been brought up before. Several times. I'm still against. – Asaf Karagila Feb 7 '14 at 8:22
• @AsafKaragila You disagree with my proposal? Is that why you downvoted? I don't think that's the function of those arrows friend. I also don't understand why you could possibly be against it. It's a feature that adds nothing but convenience – Alex Youcis Feb 7 '14 at 8:23
• @Alex: Please note that voting is different on meta, and is frequently used to indicate agreement/disagreement. – user642796 Feb 7 '14 at 8:28
• Ah, I see. I apologize then--I wasn't aware of this difference :) – Alex Youcis Feb 7 '14 at 8:30
• There have been multiple requests that certain custom macros be automatically loaded: 1, 2, 3 4. I think that until Willie Wong's proposal is finally implemented it's best to simply include the requisite \newcommand in your posts whenever you find yourself using something frequently enough in that post. (At least, that's what I do.) – user642796 Feb 7 '14 at 9:03
• Also, don't use \text for operator names. Use \mathrm at least or better yet, use \operatorname to be syntactically correct. To avoid typing that string multiple times, instead of \newcommand you should use \DeclareMathOperator, as in \DeclareMathOperator\Spec{Spec} which allows you to call \Spec to get the Roman letters Spec shown. – Willie Wong Feb 7 '14 at 9:12
• Alex, as Arthur pointed out, downvotes mean disagreement on meta. Well, usually. As to why I disagree? I think LaTeX is a style you get used to, and I don't like nudges very much. Adding global macros is one hell of a nudge. – Asaf Karagila Feb 7 '14 at 11:35
• @AsafKaragila I don't understand your comment. Not having a macro for extremely common commands just seems silly, unless it would somehow disrupt some existing setup, or is monumentally difficult to do. I mean, math.se is a very successful website, I would find it hard to believe that it would take that much time/effort for someone to introduce macros for common commands like Spec, Hom, or Ord. I mean, I understand the desire to do one big change (a la Willie Wong's suggestion) instead of a bunch of little ones. But, if we don't want to go half-way, then let's just do it. – Alex Youcis Feb 7 '14 at 11:40
• Maybe it is because I have a naive understanding of the organization of this site (this is certainly a possibility), but with the amount of foot traffic it receives, I would assume there is someone who takes care of these types of things? Even if it would take a long time to complete, have their been moves to get the ball rolling? Thanks for any information! :) – Alex Youcis Feb 7 '14 at 11:42
• @WillieWong I think I'll use $\text{}$ :) It's less letters, and it's for math.se. In an actual TeX program I'd use DeclareMathOperator, but that seems painful here. Thanks for the suggestion! – Alex Youcis Feb 7 '14 at 11:43
• Alex, I expressed my opinions on the matter at least once in the links given by Arthur. You might want to read about nudge theory, in case you don't know what that is. – Asaf Karagila Feb 7 '14 at 11:45

• \‌spec% $\to$ \operatorname{spec}; the % character is used as a delimiter of operator name
• \‌RR $\to$ \mathbb{R}; same for other double-capital letters
• H\‌"older $\to$ Hölder; L'H\‌^opital $\to$ L'Hôpital, Amp\‌`ere $\to$ Ampère, Poincar\‌'e $\to$ Poincaré, Erd\‌H{o}s $\to$ Erdős, etc.