[nabla9]

The reason for LaTeX is the output quality, not the input.

Real LaTeX users don't use LaTeX to write documents.

  whatever -> pandoc -> LaTeX -> perfect document
                          ^
                          |
      LaTeX template  ----+

[vouaobrasil]

I was formerly in academia and I've never seen anyone use Pandoc. I've seen lots of people using straight LaTeX though.

[mmplxx]

Nice in theory, in practice you have LaTeX tools with synctex, command, environment and references autocompletion, live math preview, proper syntax highlighting, jump to error line, etc. Nothing like that is available for pandoc markdown AFAIK, except perhaps for Quarto, which may have its uses but is too slow for small/medium sized documents and its tooling is not that capable anyway. Besides, it adds yet another complex layer on top of an already way too layered stack.

[mapreduce]

> Real LaTeX users don't use LaTeX to write documents.

Really? That's a bold claim. Got any source or stats for that?

I assure you I am a real LaTeX user and I use LaTeX to write documents. I see everyone around me doing the same.

[trueismywork]

Most of the things that need to be written in LaTeX (math) cannot be written in any other language yet.

[nabla9]

There are lots of applications that can be used to write math that is converted into LaTeX equations. You can also use MathML -> Latex

The equation subset is the best part of LaTeX syntax and so many people learn it. It's very compact compared to alternatives.

[cbolton]

I find the typst syntax nicer and more compact: https://typst.app/docs/guides/guide-for-latex-users/#maths

I was initially suprised to see that the typst devs chose to go with their own syntax, but I'm now very happy they did.

[trueismywork]

I would be interested to see how the formula looks for a more complicated equation. For example, Eq 3.12 or 3.31 in the link https://arxiv.org/pdf/2203.09346.pdf

[cbolton]

here's 3.31:

  $
  cal(C)(M) = cal(E)_T^t (theta, cal(S)_t)^2 + C_t M_t^(-2/d)
  + cal(E)_T^"PDE" (theta_t, cal(S)_"int")^2 + C_"PDE" M_"int"^(-2/(d+1)) \
  + C_1T^(1/2) [cal(E)_T^"div" (theta, cal(S)_"int") + C_"div" M_"int"^(-1/(d+1))
  + (1+nu)(cal(E)_T^s (theta, cal(S)_s) + C_s M_s^(-1/d))]
  $

Would you have the equivalent LaTeX code for comparison?

[trueismywork]

It should be in the LaTeX sources on the website. This does look much more compact though.

Just to now push it a little. I wonder if I can make the `1/(d+1)` in the superscript be not a real fraction but inline fraction.

[trueismywork]

Thanks for your effort. With this example, I started testing typst again and it does look to have improved quite a bit. And it is of course extremely fast.

[ioasuncvinvaer]

should be close to 3.12

  $
  norm((u_0)_j-hat(u)_j (t=0))_(L^2 TT^d) &<= norm(u_j - hat(u)_j)_(L^2 delta Omega) \
  &<= sqrt(2 max {2h_Omega,d+1} / rho_Omega) norm(u_j - hat(u)_j)_(H^1 (Omega)) \
  &<= sqrt(2 max {2h_Omega,d+1} / rho_Omega) C_(1,k,d+1,u_1) lambda_1 (N) N^(-k+1)
  $

[trueismywork]

Thanks for your effort. This was instructive. Seems there's a decent alternative to LaTeX. May be over time it becomes as powerful in all respects.

[Ar-Curunir]

What nonsense lol. Nobody in computer science writes their papers in markdown.