Earlier quoted context omitted.
The about summarizes it: > Experimental Oxidization of Tectonic the TeX/LaTeX engine.
Does "oxidization" mean "a port to the rust language" ?
[deleted]
Rewriting LaTeX in Pure Rust
31–40 of 148 posts
Re: Rewriting LaTeX in Pure Rust
#32Previous discussion: 1 year ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21172964 3.5 years ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14450448 The project seems pretty active, though, so some of that may now be irrelevant.
Why it may be irrelevant that the project is active? Not sure I understood the point behind your last sentence. Can you explain please?
Re: Rewriting LaTeX in Pure Rust
#33This looks amazing and like everything I always wanted.
Sadly, I think basing off XeTeX and not LuaTeX is a mistake. Certainly renders it unusable for me. Having Lua integration is just great.
Also, `lualatex` does not have some of the limitations of `xelatex` (memory limitations, `contours` package, ...), but I guess this XeTeX reimplementation can work on removing those implementations, so that only lack of Lua integration remains.
Also, like another person said, not having biber breaks my workflow as well, which specifically tries to leverage the "latest and greatest" of what LaTeX has to offer [0]: `pdflatex` is obsolete, so `lualatex` it is. `nomencl`, `makeindex` etc. are obsolete, so `glossaries-extra` it is. `bibtex` is obsolete, so `biber` it is. Throw in `latexmk` for automatic compilation (which the tool presented here does too, which is a biggie! [1]) and CI/CD and you have a 1970s tool in 2020s attire. Lua rounds off the picture.
Among other things, this given Unicode-native (gasp) code/documents, and great automation capabilities (`latexmk`, CI/CD, Lua).
I think a modern TeX engine reimplementation should support all of the above, which are arguably the best modern options there are.
[0]: https://collaborating.tuhh.de/alex/latex-git-cookbook [1]: I wonder if the logs are available though? aux, blg etc. are important for debugging and shouldn't be dropped outright.
Re: Rewriting LaTeX in Pure Rust
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
> For the longest time the open source community has shown that it has an issue with innovation How so? A bunch of my favorite software has no real closed-source equivalent, sometime precisely because it’s open source.
The vast majority of open source software is a clone of a closed-source alternative. I currently having issues with thinking of a widely adopted, consumer-oriented software that has no closed-source alternative. What is your favorite software that has no real closed-source equivalent?
TeX... ?
Re: Rewriting LaTeX in Pure Rust
#35Previous discussion: 1 year ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21172964 3.5 years ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14450448 The project seems pretty active, though, so some of that may now be irrelevant.
Why it may be irrelevant that the project is active? Not sure I understood the point behind your last sentence. Can you explain please?
I think the intent is: the previous discussions were some time ago and may be out of date, so those links may not be relevant.
Re: Rewriting LaTeX in Pure Rust
#36This is great. After all these years the venerable and super useful TeX/LaTeX meme has once again managed to propagate into a new and exiting ecosystem. This would be good for the insufferable Rust community as well, I hope. Perhaps as the language they invested their identity in, actually becomes useful and venerated, they will calm the fuck down and start becoming adult members of the useful tool community.
Nice one rustcucks, next do Python.
Re: Rewriting LaTeX in Pure Rust
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
The vast majority of open source software is a clone of a closed-source alternative. I currently having issues with thinking of a widely adopted, consumer-oriented software that has no closed-source alternative. What is your favorite software that has no real closed-source equivalent?
QEMU, maybe?
how is this widely adopted, think in the scale of Linux or Gimp.
Re: Rewriting LaTeX in Pure Rust
#38Why link to a fork instead of the main project? https://github.com/tectonic-typesetting/tectonic
The reason is that the main project is written in C whereas this fork uses Rust instead as explained in https://github.com/tectonic-typesetting/tectonic/issues/459
How much of that is auto-generated and pre-existing C code though? My dusty recollection from a while ago is that most of Tectonic's development is in Rust. It looks like the fork is trying to get rid of all the remaining C code?
Re: Rewriting LaTeX in Pure Rust
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
That fork is quite curious, it seems like they've really gone out and created quite an active little fork, but haven't spent the time to explain what is different and interesting about their fork in the readme.
The about summarizes it: > Experimental Oxidization of Tectonic the TeX/LaTeX engine.
...but it's forked from an existing Rust port of Latex.
That's the bit that intrigues me; what is the difference between this port and the original?
Re: Rewriting LaTeX in Pure Rust
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
QEMU, maybe?
how is this widely adopted, think in the scale of Linux or Gimp.
In addition to being useful in its own right, QEMU powers or has powered a number of virtualization projects, including VirtualBox's software-based virtualization, parts of Xen, Android Studio's emulator, …