3 ms·
This article makes a ton of good points, but misses typesetting. A lot of the books he cites got typeset with troff. Certainly all of Kernighan's books, and a
by bediger 16y ago
This article makes a ton of good points, but misses typesetting. A lot of the books he cites got typeset with troff. Certainly all of Kernighan's books, and all of Stevn's books, got typeset using troff.
It's not that troff is so great at user input (it's not, it's frighteningly difficult) but that the output is so good. I know that Stevens tweaked the troff to get good output, too. No orphans, widows or rivers for him.
Books typeset using "Word" are typically, though not always, not good books. Word's output is usually a little goofy. Word also seems to tempt people into doing stupid things, too. Maybe Word is too easy, and authors end up writing too much, but something causes Word-set books to be a bit worse in general than other typesetting-method-books.
- beej71 16y agoWord processors are just not typesetting/page layout tools, generally. Plus, good page layout is hard. I certainly have plenty of bad examples on my shelf--not that I'm brilliant at it myself, or anything.
- cema 16y agoWhat about good old LaTeX?
- me2i81 16y agotroff is kind of long in the tooth these days as its niche has been mostly taken over by TeX/LaTeX. The only place I ever see nroff/troff used nowadays is Unix manpages. Old Bell Labs guys probably still use troff. Just keep in mind that you don't have to use Knuth's fonts to use TeX, just as you don't have to use Times Roman to use troff.