4 ms·
Similar to the experiences of other commenters, I find the LaTeX edit-compile-review cycle to only grow unreasonably slow when none of the incremental compilati
by balddenimhero 4y ago
Similar to the experiences of other commenters, I find the LaTeX edit-compile-review cycle to only grow unreasonably slow when none of the incremental compilation features are used. For larger documents I recommend (i) splitting the document to leverage the \include and \includeonly commands, and (ii) using the Tikz library "external" to avoid the unnecessary recompilation of unchanged graphics. PGF/TikZ is often a bottleneck.
I agree though that it would be nice if the compilation (esp. from scratch) were generally faster.
- gnatolf 4y agoStill even using all of that, my thesis with heavy inline tikz took about 5 minutes per run (about 120 pages). And a full rerun with all tikz graphs redone (about 20), it took just shy of 20 minutes if the indexes existed already. That was all on a surface 4 pro from ~2015.
- yakubin 4y agoWow. That's competing with some C++ projects.
- 41b696ef1113 4y agoThe number one reason to lean heavily on sectioning via \include is for debugging. Debugging Latex is a disaster, and it is only by compartmentalizing code into smaller sections do you have a hope of isolating the problem.