From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HTML_MESSAGE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 22565 invoked from network); 13 Jan 2022 22:27:22 -0000 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (45.79.103.53) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 13 Jan 2022 22:27:22 -0000 Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 100159D4B4; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 08:27:22 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D74DD9D4B2; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 08:27:17 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: minnie.tuhs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="ps9oo735"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id C21259D4B2; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 08:27:16 +1000 (AEST) X-Greylist: delayed 452 seconds by postgrey-1.36 at minnie.tuhs.org; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 08:27:15 AEST Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (pb-sasl21.pobox.com [173.228.157.49]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DACAC9D06B for ; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 08:27:15 +1000 (AEST) Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-sasl21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26559AD2E7; Thu, 13 Jan 2022 17:19:42 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from davida@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from :message-id:content-type:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to :cc:to:references; s=sasl; bh=XTi8hJWPPnX/T1Ad4QGeLYozEBb68Rj/Dr pdAhjizlo=; b=ps9oo735GSY2BBHOrzS4kARkxWyoY9QOGufTV+Ki3Csw7W3GA9 YswBFsFsfS8xluYhDE9zhRvlrTfmpwLcMky6bEoJa2vmx/evtbvM4PfU0tc7JPmu wDdeFfdn8DYFM0mMQ7o467HvqNBJ+CAhLsLR/0pT/sHWyaPQ7DjHdK1j0= Received: from pb-sasl21.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-sasl21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12A12AD2E6; Thu, 13 Jan 2022 17:19:42 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from davida@pobox.com) Received: from [192.168.86.129] (unknown [203.132.93.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-sasl21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1969DAD2E5; Thu, 13 Jan 2022 17:19:38 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from davida@pobox.com) From: David Arnold Message-Id: <94F48429-0CD7-4C9B-867F-DC75B797DFA8@pobox.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.21\)) Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2022 09:19:35 +1100 In-Reply-To: To: Computer Old Farts Followers References: X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.21) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: E61CD7C2-74BE-11EC-ABF4-B5C32D76E417-29049682!pb-sasl21.pobox.com Subject: Re: [COFF] Scribe (Typesetting System) and Unix X-BeenThere: coff@minnie.tuhs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: Computer Old Farts Forum List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0121981545120893844==" Errors-To: coff-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "COFF" --===============0121981545120893844== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_58C9BD63-3BBC-41F4-B3DA-7329E4A06C69" --Apple-Mail=_58C9BD63-3BBC-41F4-B3DA-7329E4A06C69 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > On 14 Jan 2022, at 03:33, Dan Cross wrote: >=20 > On Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 10:32 PM Theodore Ts'o > wrote: > Speaking of typesetting equations, how would people compare eqn versus > LaTeX? I used nroff for man pages, but I never did learn how to use > eqn for nroff. >=20 > I hate to be the one who says this, but when it comes to typesetting = non-trivial mathematics, there is no competition: LaTeX beats eqn hands = down. eqn is fine up to a point (and the neqn thing is kinda nifty for = simple things on the terminal; you can kinda sorta get a rendered sigma = for a summation, for example) but it breaks down pretty quickly. Both FrameMaker and Word have GUI equation editors. They=E2=80=99re = pretty capable, but are a separate =E2=80=9Cworld=E2=80=9D from the = text: they open a new window for editing the equation that floats over = the document. I much preferred (I don=E2=80=99t do a lot of equations these days) the = inline nature of LaTeX (and (n)eqn)). d= --Apple-Mail=_58C9BD63-3BBC-41F4-B3DA-7329E4A06C69 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
On = 14 Jan 2022, at 03:33, Dan Cross <crossd@gmail.com> wrote:

On Wed, Jan 12, 2022 at 10:32 PM = Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> wrote:
Speaking of typesetting equations, how would people compare eqn = versus
LaTeX?  I used nroff for man pages, but I never did learn how to = use
eqn for nroff.

I hate to be the one who says this, but = when it comes to typesetting non-trivial mathematics, there is no = competition: LaTeX beats eqn hands down. eqn is fine up to a point (and = the neqn thing is kinda nifty for simple things on the terminal; you can = kinda sorta get a rendered sigma for a summation, for example) but it = breaks down pretty quickly.

Both FrameMaker and Word have GUI equation = editors.  They=E2=80=99re pretty capable, but are a separate = =E2=80=9Cworld=E2=80=9D from the text: they open a new window for = editing the equation that floats over the document.

I much preferred (I don=E2=80=99t do a = lot of equations these days) the inline nature of LaTeX (and = (n)eqn)).




d
= --Apple-Mail=_58C9BD63-3BBC-41F4-B3DA-7329E4A06C69-- --===============0121981545120893844== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: inline X19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX19fX18KQ09GRiBtYWls aW5nIGxpc3QKQ09GRkBtaW5uaWUudHVocy5vcmcKaHR0cHM6Ly9taW5uaWUudHVocy5vcmcvY2dp LWJpbi9tYWlsbWFuL2xpc3RpbmZvL2NvZmYK --===============0121981545120893844==--