Live data from Hacker News

The LaTeX Fetish (2016)

danielallington.net

51–60 of 185 posts

Re: The LaTeX Fetish (2016)

#51
post #18
post #12

I had a few things about TeX versus LaTeX. I think the reality is nobody really tries writing TeX. But, ultimately my beef is the straw man that markup is bad because it is harder to read. That a graphical editor is superior because it is more readable. Instead, the advantage is that in the one you are only writing text and you are indicating special instructions to the computer. In the other, you only see what the c…

The other huge advantage that you almost touched on is tex files are text, so you can source control them. This is particularly important if different people are working on different chunks of a document. You can kind of hack around this in word, but it's a giant pita.

Even better, you can script parts. Yes, the text nature was what I was highlighting. I didn't want to overstate it.

In particular, for short papers within a term, the sharing feature of word is decent enough. I confess I prefer text source control, but I know most of my peers in school did not.

Re: The LaTeX Fetish (2016)

#52
post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've worked with O'Reilly and Wrox and both have you do one document per chapter Ouch. The number of times I have changed stuff like gutters, margins, chapter headings, caption fonts and layouts would make that an absolute nightmare. I am really happy how easy all that stuff is in LaTeX. (Of course, other things are a nightmare.)

> The number of times I have changed stuff like gutters, margins, chapter headings, caption fonts and layouts would make that an absolute nightmare. The big publishers don't give you control over that. They give you a template and you have to stick to it. As an author your first and only job is to provide the content (typically). Not everyone knows this but MS Word lets you create formatting blocks that essential beh…

I am self-publishing.

> Not everyone knows this but MS Word lets you create formatting blocks that essential behave like CSS classes. Most people have used MS Word Heading, Sub Heading, etc not realizing that as long as you never touch the font formatting options the classes can be changed globally just by applying a different template.

Absolutely, but it's going to be a nightmare when all of my 40 chapters are in a different word doc...

Re: The LaTeX Fetish (2016)

#53
post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The other huge advantage that you almost touched on is tex files are text, so you can source control them. This is particularly important if different people are working on different chunks of a document. You can kind of hack around this in word, but it's a giant pita.

Word has its own version control built in, which works pretty well. You can see all revisions, and step through and accept/reject. You can also do diff of two documents.

This is definitely good for papers that are "one and done." Just don't upgrade during. And try to have a set of coworkers are using the same version and is.

Re: The LaTeX Fetish (2016)

#54
post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The other huge advantage that you almost touched on is tex files are text, so you can source control them. This is particularly important if different people are working on different chunks of a document. You can kind of hack around this in word, but it's a giant pita.

Word has its own version control built in, which works pretty well. You can see all revisions, and step through and accept/reject. You can also do diff of two documents.

[deleted]

Re: The LaTeX Fetish (2016)

#55
post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've worked with O'Reilly and Wrox and both have you do one document per chapter Ouch. The number of times I have changed stuff like gutters, margins, chapter headings, caption fonts and layouts would make that an absolute nightmare. I am really happy how easy all that stuff is in LaTeX. (Of course, other things are a nightmare.)

> The number of times I have changed stuff like gutters, margins, chapter headings, caption fonts and layouts would make that an absolute nightmare. The big publishers don't give you control over that. They give you a template and you have to stick to it. As an author your first and only job is to provide the content (typically). Not everyone knows this but MS Word lets you create formatting blocks that essential beh…

> I always assume they simply have a script that pulls out the raw text with formatting indicators and compiles it all together.

Not sure how it works for titles that are really 100 % text, but if any layouting has to be done for images etc. a typical workflow is to import all the files into a DTP/layout application like Adobe InDesign and do the final steps there. InDesign can import the format labels from Word and map them to its own.

Re: The LaTeX Fetish (2016)

#56
post #17

I agree with the overall sentiment, but I don't think that any WYSIWYG alternative exists yet that: - Interacts well with version control: it is trivial to maintain a LaTeX document in a git repo, and the diffs are readable (especially with --color-words) - Makes it possible to programmatically generate formatted text, tables, graphs, possibly from external data sources, either with the internal macro language or thr…

I believe that Google Docs actually handles all of those.

It does, but it has a lot of the same problems as MS Office, some worse. The scripting/macro system is arcane, proprietary, and only works in the cloud. The files aren't in an easily parseable format. You can export them to OOXML/ODF, but then you're stuck with parsing some ridiculously complex markup. As far as I know the version history is not exportable either.

Re: The LaTeX Fetish (2016)

#57
I've spent a lot of time in both Word and LaTeX writing papers and reports in grad school, and nowadays, strictly use LaTeX. I feel like the author missed some crucial elements as to why people use the latter. First, references, cross-references, and citations. These are all shockingly simple in LaTeX. \ref or \cite is all you have to think about to cite papers or reference figures, tables, etc. In Word, I have used Mendeley's citation system, and the built in cross reference system to the same task, but when it comes to the editing process between multiple people and having different files sent around, it invariably breaks, leading to hours of extra work either doing it manually (have fun updating figure numbers if you add another one, or citation superscript), or reinserting all the necessary cross references. With a LaTeX file, this is pretty hard to break.

Secondly, LaTeX handles figures 10000x better than Word, in that you just let it figure out placement inline. Captions are as simple as possible. Meanwhile, have you ever had that Word document with 10 figures in which you move one inline image, and every figure jumps to a different page, leading to spam clicking Ctrl+z? Or how about adding figure captions? Inline you have to use the caption tool, which isn't fantastic and often creates a text box that isn't strictly tied to the figure. The method I found best was just to have another document simply for figures and write the captions in regular text. This both looks bad, and during the editing process, requires you to switch between files to keep track of the figures that are being referenced in the text. Additionally, automatic figure numbering depends on where the figure anchor is, often leading to improper numbering. Again, referencing figures by number in Word is a nightmare that LaTeX handles amazingly.

Third, I agree, setting up LaTeX on a machine isn't fun, and I have always been bad at it. However, I don't do it anymore. ShareLaTeX has solved all of those problems for me. All packages are available, you don't have the funny "compile three times to get reference numbering correct", it's amazing at collaboration with both git-like diffs as well as Word-like track changes/commenting system, and has tons of templates so the pain of setting up your document's preamble is done for you.

One tip I have is if someone you work with doesn't know LaTeX and can't be convinced to learn it, still write in LaTeX, compile to pdf, and use Acrobat to convert to Word. That works surprisingly well. The Lyx version conversion does not work nearly as well. I can't say I've tried pandoc though, I would like to try that next.

Re: The LaTeX Fetish (2016)

#58
post #12

I had a few things about TeX versus LaTeX. I think the reality is nobody really tries writing TeX. But, ultimately my beef is the straw man that markup is bad because it is harder to read. That a graphical editor is superior because it is more readable. Instead, the advantage is that in the one you are only writing text and you are indicating special instructions to the computer. In the other, you only see what the c…

Yup, many times I have needed to blast misbehaving text with "Clear Formatting" or delete it entirely and recreate it.

Re: The LaTeX Fetish (2016)

#59
post #4

The author doesn't like writing using markup languages. Some of the rest of us do. I'm with him to the extent that LaTeX evangelism can be oversold - when I'm talking to curious colleagues I tend to stress the vertical learning curve as much as the quality typesetting and convenient cross-referencing - but I do think most of his argument is simply a matter of personal preference. For me, the fairly stiff default stru…

> For me, the fairly stiff default structure imposed by a LaTeX document class makes my writing easier, quite apart from any advantages at the publishing stage.

True, and if you write a lot of documentation or articles that require similar formatting, it's actually not that hard once you understand LaTeX to set up your own class that builds on one of the built in ones to make things look nicer or work in slightly different ways. You can get really nice, consistent documents without doing any extra formatting work.

Re: The LaTeX Fetish (2016)

#60
post #18
post #12

I had a few things about TeX versus LaTeX. I think the reality is nobody really tries writing TeX. But, ultimately my beef is the straw man that markup is bad because it is harder to read. That a graphical editor is superior because it is more readable. Instead, the advantage is that in the one you are only writing text and you are indicating special instructions to the computer. In the other, you only see what the c…

The other huge advantage that you almost touched on is tex files are text, so you can source control them. This is particularly important if different people are working on different chunks of a document. You can kind of hack around this in word, but it's a giant pita.

There are git review tools that are able to diff docx.
Post reply on HN