[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: lout equations, general commentary.
From: |
Glauber Ribeiro |
Subject: |
Re: lout equations, general commentary. |
Date: |
Sat, 14 Aug 1999 01:30:23 +0400 (MSD) |
David,
i like to think of the relationship between TeX and Lout as similar to that of
assembly language and a 3rd generation programming language such as Pascal.
Lout tends to be more verbose, but it's a lot easier to understand. TeX is
terse and gives you machine-language power to do anything.
LaTeX is just plain weird! :-) :-) :-)
glauber
---
Glauber Ribeiro
address@hidden
"Wherever you go, that's where you are."
On Fri, 13 Aug 1999 11:00:21 David Feuer wrote:
>I have just started looking at lout, which seems to have some
>nice features, but it seems to me that its syntax is extremely
>verbose, its mathematics unstructured, and its command namespace
>far too flat.
> It seems to take quite a bit of typing to get even a simple
>equation. One of the great advantages of TeX is that even
>complex equations can be created without slowing the typist too
>much. Lout's equations don't seem so friendly. The added
>verbosity is quite acceptible in a high-level math language like
>ML, in which the equation must include abstract meaning as well
>as formatting, but seems excessive in a pure formatting
>language. I also think that lout's (like TeX's) equation
>language is not nearly structured enough. It does not seem to
>care about the intrinsic grouping of the equation, ending up with
>an equation that looks good on paper, but is not very meaningful
>internally. While I could easily be mistaken, it does not seem
>that the logical components of an equation are boxed together.
> There seem to be many top-level macros for doing similar
>things. For instance, there is a separate macro for each
>paragraph style, though fortunately they are all based on a
>parameterized primitive. I think it would be much nicer if the
>command namespace were partitioned. For instance,
>parstyle.ragged
>parstyle.normal
>and so on.
>
> I really like lout's "objects". They are far, far better than
>TeX boxes. I also like the diagramming tools, which seem to be
>one of its stronger features. The table support also looks
>really good. TeX alignments are rather limited. I suppose that
>each formatting system will have certain strengths, depending on
>the needs of the author.
>
>--
>This message has been brought to you by the letter alpha and the
>number pi.
>
>David Feuer
>address@hidden
>address@hidden
>Open Source: Think locally; act globally.
>Check out humbolt.geo.uu.nl/lists
>
>
--== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.