3 ms·

LaTeX is not an efficient way to create anything. But, to be fair, it's not supposed to be efficient - it's supposed to be consistent. But I really wish it wa

LaTeX is not an efficient way to create anything. But, to be fair, it's not supposed to be efficient - it's supposed to be consistent. But I really wish it was less painful to use.

pmiller2 9y ago
It's a very efficient way to typeset good looking mathematics. Of course, that's no surprise, because that's what it was built for.
- abritinthebay 9y ago
  I’d argue it’s effective, not efficient, there. But that might be splitting semantic hairs
  - lorenzhs 9y ago
    Like so many tools that originate in that time, it is very efficient after an initial learning curve. I use LaTeX to typeset theoretical CS things (papers, exercise sheets, ...), and those often contain a fair amount of mathematical notation. Expressing them in LaTeX math notation comes quite naturally to me now and doesn't require much thought at all. And when I do miss some symbol, there are excellent tools like http://detexify.kirelabs.org/classify.html http://detexify.kirelabs.org/classify.html.
    - abritinthebay 9y ago
      I’m curious - what’s your definition of efficiency here? I would include learning time in that, plus cognitive load, and it’s clear you are not.
- IvanAnishchuk 9y ago
  Not just maths. It can be used to typeset books on any topics quite well, I did it for while a few years back. Text format makes it easy to convert any sources to it, and if you don't need many formulae nor tables/figures typesetting becomes pretty trivial. And unlike visual typesetting tools you almost can make an error of moving some guide too far or something, if you say 10mm margin it'll be a 10mm margin (visual tools have their use, I guess, just not when you're a geek and prefers to see code and not a picture). And it even warns you about underfilling/overfilling, what's not to love? And speaking of word/openoffice/google docs. Those are text processing tools, not typesetting ones. If you need typesetting on any complexity their are the absolute worst choice. If your CV has a very simple structure and style, on the other hand, sure, go ahead. I wonder if any tech recruiters notice this kind of things... If I wanted to hire nerds, I'd surely notice. CV made in word, marked with "not geek enough" :)

LaTeX is not an efficient way to create anything. But, to be fair, it's not supposed to be efficient - it's supposed to be consistent. But I really wish it was less painful to use.

pmiller2 9y ago

It's a very efficient way to typeset good looking mathematics. Of course, that's no surprise, because that's what it was built for.

abritinthebay 9y ago
I’d argue it’s effective, not efficient, there. But that might be splitting semantic hairs
- lorenzhs 9y ago
  Like so many tools that originate in that time, it is very efficient after an initial learning curve. I use LaTeX to typeset theoretical CS things (papers, exercise sheets, ...), and those often contain a fair amount of mathematical notation. Expressing them in LaTeX math notation comes quite naturally to me now and doesn't require much thought at all. And when I do miss some symbol, there are excellent tools like http://detexify.kirelabs.org/classify.html http://detexify.kirelabs.org/classify.html.
  - abritinthebay 9y ago
    I’m curious - what’s your definition of efficiency here? I would include learning time in that, plus cognitive load, and it’s clear you are not.
IvanAnishchuk 9y ago
Not just maths. It can be used to typeset books on any topics quite well, I did it for while a few years back. Text format makes it easy to convert any sources to it, and if you don't need many formulae nor tables/figures typesetting becomes pretty trivial. And unlike visual typesetting tools you almost can make an error of moving some guide too far or something, if you say 10mm margin it'll be a 10mm margin (visual tools have their use, I guess, just not when you're a geek and prefers to see code and not a picture). And it even warns you about underfilling/overfilling, what's not to love? And speaking of word/openoffice/google docs. Those are text processing tools, not typesetting ones. If you need typesetting on any complexity their are the absolute worst choice. If your CV has a very simple structure and style, on the other hand, sure, go ahead. I wonder if any tech recruiters notice this kind of things... If I wanted to hire nerds, I'd surely notice. CV made in word, marked with "not geek enough" :)