Mint Is Not TeX
mint.ubavic.rs
Mint Is Not TeX
1–7 of 7 posts
Re: Mint Is Not TeX
#2Re: Mint Is Not TeX
#3Unfortunately, Lout never really took off, but I have fond memories of it. I liked it more than LaTeX, too.
Re: Mint Is Not TeX
#4With all the @ symbols, it reminds me a lot of Lout. Unfortunately, Lout never really took off, but I have fond memories of it. I liked it more than LaTeX, too. [0]: https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Lout
Re: Mint Is Not TeX
#5With all the @ symbols, it reminds me a lot of Lout. Unfortunately, Lout never really took off, but I have fond memories of it. I liked it more than LaTeX, too. [0]: https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Lout
Re: Mint Is Not TeX
#6Typst is on my list, I wanted to have a look at this year, but unfortunately no time and no need. Except for one letter every one or two years I did not use LaTeX since my diploma thesis.
Re: Mint Is Not TeX
#7With all the @ symbols, it reminds me a lot of Lout. Unfortunately, Lout never really took off, but I have fond memories of it. I liked it more than LaTeX, too. [0]: https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Lout
That is something I accidentally discovered. TexInfo also uses @.
[1] https://bitsavers.org/pdf/cmu/scribe/Scribe_Introductory_Use... [2] https://bitsavers.org/pdf/unilogic/Scribe_Document_Productio... [3] https://bitsavers.org/pdf/unilogic/Scribe_Pocket_Reference.p... [4] http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/cmu/spice/Users_Manual_for_Mint...