3 ms·

There are two problems with TeX (in general): 1. It is a local maximum. It produces great output and works now. Changing it requires a huge effort which will r

by jwr 15y ago

There are two problems with TeX (in general): 1. It is a local maximum. It produces great output and works now. Changing it requires a huge effort which will result in a system that is inferior, for many years to come. Only then another maximum could be achieved. This means there is resistance to change — it's easier to adapt to TeX's flaws than it is to write something completely new. Many systems suffer from similar fate (think Emacs). 2. It is a black hole, a programmer sink. People start using TeX and curse it, then they learn it, and by the time they know its limitations and are ready to take on a job of writing something better, they are proficient enough in TeX to stay within it. Many systems suffer from similar fate (think Emacs). I wonder if something will eventually happen to budge the TeX community from where it is now.

gnosis 15y ago
The (La)TeX ecosystem is still evolving. For instance, see: LuaTeX - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LuaTeX https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LuaTeX ConTeXt - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ConTeXt https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ConTeXt LaTeX3 - http://www.latex-project.org/latex3.html http://www.latex-project.org/latex3.html
bo1024 15y ago
> 2. It is a black hole, a programmer sink. People start using TeX and curse it, then they learn it, and by the time they know its limitations and are ready to take on a job of writing something better, they are proficient enough in TeX to stay within it. Many systems suffer from similar fate (think Emacs). I don't really see this. Tex requires a huge investment to learn, but so do most programming languages. That doesn't mean the languages are bad or need replacing. I think that the high cost of entry to tex programming is not necessarily a tex problem -- it's difficult to visualize a system with equal power being much easier to learn. (Though the rough edges could be smoother.) More importantly, when you say "Take on the job of writing something better", I have to believe that there are very very few who are up for this task in the world, and it would probably require their combined efforts. It doesn't seem likely at this stage. Maybe eventually, though.
wladimir 15y ago
Many systems suffer from similar fate (think Emacs) That happens so much in software there needs to be a word for it, a term of its own. After a while, you get deep enough in the rabbit hole so that it seems your initial judgement of redundant complexity was wrong. Even though it's still true, you've adapted to it. You just can't see it from the viewpoint of someone new anymore. For this reason I tend to carefully write down my initial concerns with something. More on-topic, I don't think what TeX needs is a complete, sudden break with the past. It would be better to deprecate old, flawed features, and later on disable them and provide and optional compatibility mode (which is a bigger download).

by jwr 15y ago

gnosis 15y ago

The (La)TeX ecosystem is still evolving. For instance, see: LuaTeX - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LuaTeX https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LuaTeX ConTeXt - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ConTeXt https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ConTeXt LaTeX3 - http://www.latex-project.org/latex3.html http://www.latex-project.org/latex3.html

bo1024 15y ago

> 2. It is a black hole, a programmer sink. People start using TeX and curse it, then they learn it, and by the time they know its limitations and are ready to take on a job of writing something better, they are proficient enough in TeX to stay within it. Many systems suffer from similar fate (think Emacs). I don't really see this. Tex requires a huge investment to learn, but so do most programming languages. That doesn't mean the languages are bad or need replacing. I think that the high cost of entry to tex programming is not necessarily a tex problem -- it's difficult to visualize a system with equal power being much easier to learn. (Though the rough edges could be smoother.) More importantly, when you say "Take on the job of writing something better", I have to believe that there are very very few who are up for this task in the world, and it would probably require their combined efforts. It doesn't seem likely at this stage. Maybe eventually, though.

wladimir 15y ago

Many systems suffer from similar fate (think Emacs) That happens so much in software there needs to be a word for it, a term of its own. After a while, you get deep enough in the rabbit hole so that it seems your initial judgement of redundant complexity was wrong. Even though it's still true, you've adapted to it. You just can't see it from the viewpoint of someone new anymore. For this reason I tend to carefully write down my initial concerns with something. More on-topic, I don't think what TeX needs is a complete, sudden break with the past. It would be better to deprecate old, flawed features, and later on disable them and provide and optional compatibility mode (which is a bigger download).