Re: [9fans] TeX: hurrah!

[James Chapman <james@cs.ioc.ee>]

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no longer maintained.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.
>
>