Thanks for this. And yes, indeed, a step in the right direction! Best K >>> James Chapman 16/04/2010 2:37:20 pm >>> This page and its links maybe be interesting for understanding the relationship between latex and tex: http://www.tug.org/levels.html In my area of computer science all publications are written in latex and for a particular conference/journal a latex class or style file (I must admit to not really knowing what the difference is) is provided and must be adhered to. Everybody I know also used texlive which seems to be the standard tex distribution. It used to be tetex but this is no longer maintained. I would be great to be able to write on plan 9 and I'm very pleased to see the porting effort for tex. James On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 9:22 PM, Joseph Stewart < joseph.stewart@gmail.com > wrote: > Sorry to be a grouch, but can we change this thread to OO instead of the > advertised TeX:hurrah! thread? > I'm interested in the TeX news, but not so interested in the OO/language > debate that no doubt will go on for a while... > Thanks! > -joe > > On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 2:14 PM, Karljurgen Feuerherm < kfeuerherm@wlu.ca > > wrote: >> >> Ok--so it's agreed that it's not OO that's the problem, it's the users, >> then, who don't know which tool to use when. Not at all the same thing. >> >> And to be pedantic, since you give this example, the sun does revolve >> around the earth, so long as you choose the earth as your point of >> reference... Certain points of reference are to be preferred for certain >> things, as you said. So OO or not, as appropriate. >> >> K >> >> >>> "Patrick Kelly" < kameo76890@gmail.com > 16/04/2010 1:55:50 pm >>> >> I was just speaking generally. >> One of my major programming languages is Ada, and I doubt anyone would say >> that isn't big on provability. I've used objects a couple times, in places >> where they do in fact help, but those cases are, in general, not read >> properly. Using an object in the wrong place, which is most places, does >> lead to worse code. For most people, using the wrong tool for the wrong job >> is foolish, but for OOP lovers... >> >> The question isn't how do you prove it does reduce static provability, but >> how do you prove it does not. I can cite mathematical proof that the sun >> revolves around the earth, but we all know that's not true. That being said, >> there are studies out there about using the wrong paradigm for the wrong >> job, objects do come up. > >