3 ms·

Texmacs often get recommended, but I haven't seen any arguments for it that are compelling. I guess there must be a case for it, else no one would work on it.

by chalst 16y ago

Texmacs often get recommended, but I haven't seen any arguments for it that are compelling. I guess there must be a case for it, else no one would work on it. What do you like about it?

zem 16y ago
it's a decent middle ground between the clunkiness of wysiwyg word processors and the typing-to-reward ratio of pure markup. personally i prefer just writing markup in ascii, but if you want some of the control of tex, but dislike doing that much typing, texmacs or lyx might be just what you are looking for.
- chalst 16y ago
  I guess I should look at it. It sounds like Kile is its natural competitor.
  - zem 16y ago
    kile is more of a lyx competitor (latex frontend versus latex ide). texmacs has its own rendering engine; despite the name it does not in any way depend upon tex.
amichail 16y ago
TeXmacs is a true WYSIWYG scientific word processor. It's not a TeX/LaTeX GUI front-end. Rather, it has its own typesetter that produces quality comparable to TeX in real-time as you type.