3 ms·

I find the typst syntax nicer and more compact: https://typst.app/docs/guides/guide-for-latex-users/#maths https://typst.app/docs/guides/guide-for-latex-users/#

I find the typst syntax nicer and more compact: https://typst.app/docs/guides/guide-for-latex-users/#maths https://typst.app/docs/guides/guide-for-latex-users/#maths I was initially suprised to see that the typst devs chose to go with their own syntax, but I'm now very happy they did.

trueismywork 3y ago
I would be interested to see how the formula looks for a more complicated equation. For example, Eq 3.12 or 3.31 in the link https://arxiv.org/pdf/2203.09346.pdf https://arxiv.org/pdf/2203.09346.pdf
- ioasuncvinvaer 3y ago
  should be close to 3.12 $ norm((u_0)_j-hat(u)_j (t=0))_(L^2 TT^d) &<= norm(u_j - hat(u)_j)_(L^2 delta Omega) \ &<= sqrt(2 max {2h_Omega,d+1} / rho_Omega) norm(u_j - hat(u)_j)_(H^1 (Omega)) \ &<= sqrt(2 max {2h_Omega,d+1} / rho_Omega) C_(1,k,d+1,u_1) lambda_1 (N) N^(-k+1) $
  - trueismywork 3y ago
    Thanks for your effort. This was instructive. Seems there's a decent alternative to LaTeX. May be over time it becomes as powerful in all respects.
- cbolton 3y ago
  here's 3.31: $ cal(C)(M) = cal(E)_T^t (theta, cal(S)_t)^2 + C_t M_t^(-2/d) + cal(E)_T^"PDE" (theta_t, cal(S)_"int")^2 + C_"PDE" M_"int"^(-2/(d+1)) \ + C_1T^(1/2) [cal(E)_T^"div" (theta, cal(S)_"int") + C_"div" M_"int"^(-1/(d+1)) + (1+nu)(cal(E)_T^s (theta, cal(S)_s) + C_s M_s^(-1/d))] $ Would you have the equivalent LaTeX code for comparison?
  - trueismywork 3y ago
    It should be in the LaTeX sources on the website. This does look much more compact though. Just to now push it a little. I wonder if I can make the `1/(d+1)` in the superscript be not a real fraction but inline fraction.
    - cbolton 3y ago
      You can do that by escaping the slash: `1\/(d+1)`
      - trueismywork 3y ago
        Cool
    - cbolton 3y ago
      Here are the LaTeX versions from the article source: \begin{align} \begin{split} \mathcal{C}(M) = &\: \Et^t(\theta,\S_t)^2 + C_t M_t^{-\frac{2}{d}} + \Et^\pde(\theta,\S_\inte)^2 +C_\pde M_\mathrm{int}^{-\frac{2}{d+1}}\\&+ C_1{T}^{\frac{1}{2}} \bigg[\Et^\divv(\theta,\S_\inte) +C_\divv M_\mathrm{int}^{-\frac{1}{d+1}}+(1+\nu) big( \Et^s(\theta,\S_s) + C_s M_s^{-\frac{1}{d}}\big)\bigg],\\ \end{split} \end{align} and for 3.12: \begin{align} \begin{split} \norm{(u_0)_j-\hu_j(t=0)}_{L^2(\mathbb{T}^d)} &\leq \norm{u_j-\hu_j}_{L^2(\partial \Omega)} \\&\leq \sqrt{\frac{2\max\left\{2h_\Omega,d+1\right\}} {\rho_\Omega}}\norm{u_j-\hu_j}_{H^1(\Omega)}\\ &\leq \sqrt{\frac{2\max\left\{2h_\Omega,d+1\right\}} {\rho_\Omega}}C_{1,k,d+1, u_1} \lambda_{1}(N)N^{-k+1}, \end{split} \end{align} Note that these rely on user-defined commands \Et, \pde, \inte, \divv, \S, \hu, for example \renewcommand{\S}{\mathcal{S}} and \newcommand{\Et}{\mathcal{E}_T}.
      - trueismywork 3y ago
        Yup. Much more verbose. However, I must admit, all the unescaped names in Typst leaves me with any eerie feeling. It seems a ground ripe for a name conflict at some point. Or a bottleneck for customization like calligraphic C or script C.

trueismywork 3y ago

I would be interested to see how the formula looks for a more complicated equation. For example, Eq 3.12 or 3.31 in the link https://arxiv.org/pdf/2203.09346.pdf https://arxiv.org/pdf/2203.09346.pdf

ioasuncvinvaer 3y ago
should be close to 3.12 $ norm((u_0)_j-hat(u)_j (t=0))_(L^2 TT^d) &<= norm(u_j - hat(u)_j)_(L^2 delta Omega) \ &<= sqrt(2 max {2h_Omega,d+1} / rho_Omega) norm(u_j - hat(u)_j)_(H^1 (Omega)) \ &<= sqrt(2 max {2h_Omega,d+1} / rho_Omega) C_(1,k,d+1,u_1) lambda_1 (N) N^(-k+1) $
- trueismywork 3y ago
  Thanks for your effort. This was instructive. Seems there's a decent alternative to LaTeX. May be over time it becomes as powerful in all respects.
cbolton 3y ago
here's 3.31: $ cal(C)(M) = cal(E)_T^t (theta, cal(S)_t)^2 + C_t M_t^(-2/d) + cal(E)_T^"PDE" (theta_t, cal(S)_"int")^2 + C_"PDE" M_"int"^(-2/(d+1)) \ + C_1T^(1/2) [cal(E)_T^"div" (theta, cal(S)_"int") + C_"div" M_"int"^(-1/(d+1)) + (1+nu)(cal(E)_T^s (theta, cal(S)_s) + C_s M_s^(-1/d))] $ Would you have the equivalent LaTeX code for comparison?
- trueismywork 3y ago
  It should be in the LaTeX sources on the website. This does look much more compact though. Just to now push it a little. I wonder if I can make the `1/(d+1)` in the superscript be not a real fraction but inline fraction.
  - cbolton 3y ago
    You can do that by escaping the slash: `1\/(d+1)`
    - trueismywork 3y ago
      Cool
  - cbolton 3y ago
    Here are the LaTeX versions from the article source: \begin{align} \begin{split} \mathcal{C}(M) = &\: \Et^t(\theta,\S_t)^2 + C_t M_t^{-\frac{2}{d}} + \Et^\pde(\theta,\S_\inte)^2 +C_\pde M_\mathrm{int}^{-\frac{2}{d+1}}\\&+ C_1{T}^{\frac{1}{2}} \bigg[\Et^\divv(\theta,\S_\inte) +C_\divv M_\mathrm{int}^{-\frac{1}{d+1}}+(1+\nu) big( \Et^s(\theta,\S_s) + C_s M_s^{-\frac{1}{d}}\big)\bigg],\\ \end{split} \end{align} and for 3.12: \begin{align} \begin{split} \norm{(u_0)_j-\hu_j(t=0)}_{L^2(\mathbb{T}^d)} &\leq \norm{u_j-\hu_j}_{L^2(\partial \Omega)} \\&\leq \sqrt{\frac{2\max\left\{2h_\Omega,d+1\right\}} {\rho_\Omega}}\norm{u_j-\hu_j}_{H^1(\Omega)}\\ &\leq \sqrt{\frac{2\max\left\{2h_\Omega,d+1\right\}} {\rho_\Omega}}C_{1,k,d+1, u_1} \lambda_{1}(N)N^{-k+1}, \end{split} \end{align} Note that these rely on user-defined commands \Et, \pde, \inte, \divv, \S, \hu, for example \renewcommand{\S}{\mathcal{S}} and \newcommand{\Et}{\mathcal{E}_T}.
    - trueismywork 3y ago
      Yup. Much more verbose. However, I must admit, all the unescaped names in Typst leaves me with any eerie feeling. It seems a ground ripe for a name conflict at some point. Or a bottleneck for customization like calligraphic C or script C.