3 ms·
I used to think it was about as good as could be expected for a graphical editor (which meant it was rubbish). And then I found LyX which was infinitely better
by adrianratnapala 10y ago
I used to think it was about as good as could be expected for a graphical editor (which meant it was rubbish). And then I found LyX which was infinitely better. That was years ago and MS might have caught up by now.
And yet, despite how much I like LyX, I keep using real LaTeX instead -- especially when there is complex maths. That's because the ability to create macros in maths eventually outweighs everything else readability-wise.
And I'm afraid the same logic applies to AsciiMath. Is there some equivalent to
\newcommand[1]{vr}{\mathbf{r_#1}}
Or am I just going to have to use somethng `bb"r"_1` for every instance? That's a lot less readable than `\vr1`.
- acrefoot 10y agoI find TeXmac's equation editor to be an even faster WYSIWIG UI than LyX's. For example, a λ is just 'l'+tab. Simarly, you can cycle through other symbols. For b: b->β-> Sadly, TeXmacs hasn't gotten as much love as it deserves: I find it way better than jupyter at producing notebooks/papers that involve math, interactive code, and prose.
- jessaustin 10y agoTeXmacs hasn't gotten as much love as it deserves... Ouch, no Ubuntu package since Vivid? The screenshots look OK... is this worth building from source?
- mhei 10y agoLyX actually has support for math macros, or is that support just not ergonomic for you? Not certain what the best way would be to support macros in a graphical math editor.
- adrianratnapala 10y agoNever noticed them. I mean you can always use evil-red-text. But then what is the point LyX?