4 ms·

> The selling point seems to be that this is more similar to Markdown. The problem is that extending Markdown syntax gets messy. #figure( image("ima

> The selling point seems to be that this is more similar to Markdown. The problem is that extending Markdown syntax gets messy. #figure( image("image.jpg", width: 70%), caption: [ Observe the image in the picture ], ) <figure> This is kind of a strange blend of Markdown, CSS, JSON, and HTML. TeX at least has a consistent syntax.

airstrike 2y ago
Strange to the untrained eye, perhaps. To me that just looks like a function. In a long document I recently wrote, I defined a custom function #let img(filepath, inset: 0.5em, caption: none) = { figure( box(inset: inset, stroke: 0.5pt + gray, image(filepath)), caption: caption ); } and just used it like: #img("images/excel-5.0.png", caption: "Microsoft Excel 5.0 was released in 1993.") edit: fixed unused inset param
- padjo 2y ago
  Looks like it has a bug, the inset parameter is unused
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - airstrike 2y ago
    Whoops, thanks. Wrote this one-off and never needed to change the inset so didn't catch that. Fixed!
smartmic 2y ago
These 6 lines actually put me off. Probably I have to read more about Typst syntax but, same for me, consistent syntax which covers necessary complexity wins over bending a markup language for purposes for which it was never intended.
- josephg 2y ago
  It’s best not to think of it as a markup language. It’s a programming language designed around the needs of outputting pdfs. Structurally it’s like a modern, nice version of php, only it’s built for academic articles rather than emitting websites. The code snippet there packs in about 8 typst concepts all at once. It’s like if someone showed off how “simple” c++ is by showing some template-heavy magic. It’s straightforward once you’ve spent time with the language, but it’s a pretty terrible place to start learning typst. (That example shows expression mode, block mode, function calling, tags, named arguments, and probably more. Whew!)
  - gauge_field 2y ago
    That is a great analogy. When I wrote my note/hws in latex, I had the urge to go look for a package more frequently. When I started converting those docs into typst, I was able to hack around more easily, it really did feel like a modern programming language that has great error messages and that I enjoyed writing in. It did not feel complex, especially with the help of compiler errors messages
- __mharrison__ 2y ago
  It's a little odd at first. I would recommend reading through the tutorial (which is quite good) and you might start to see some of the method to the madness.
orangeboats 2y ago
It may be similar to Markdown if you squint your eyes real hard, but it's not Markdown. Furthermore, quoting a random snippet without any elaboration is unhelpful and only serves to confuse people (as it already did for the other comment!) # means "evaluate". figure(...) is the function being evaluated. The syntax inside figure(...) is fairly regular, not too different from what you'd see in typical programming languages (but with a document-oriented twist like the %). <figure> may seem to be related syntatically to #figure(...), but it's not. It's just a label. Like an HTML div tag with id="figure". It can very well be changed to <foo> in your example and it'd still work.
SkiFire13 2y ago
Was do you find inconsistent here? It seems pretty consistent to me, except maybe the <figure>
- chrisweekly 2y ago
  and that <figure> tag is kind of moot -- as another commenter mentioned, it could have been some other html tag like a div
  - SkiFire13 2y ago
    It's not a tag, there aren't even HTML/XML tags in Typst. The effect of that <figure> is giving the #figure(...) element the label `figure` (i.e. the name is what's inside the <>). Probably using the label "figure" was not the best choice for an example, something like <my_figure> would have been a bit less confusing showing that it is an arbitrary name/id that you choose. Edit: and I think you also misinterpreted the other comment about the <div>. It wasn't about using <div> in place of <figure>, but rather that using <figure> in typst does the same thing as id="figure" in HTML.
    - chrisweekly 2y ago
      I stand corrected. Thanks for the detailed info.

airstrike 2y ago

Strange to the untrained eye, perhaps. To me that just looks like a function. In a long document I recently wrote, I defined a custom function #let img(filepath, inset: 0.5em, caption: none) = { figure( box(inset: inset, stroke: 0.5pt + gray, image(filepath)), caption: caption ); } and just used it like: #img("images/excel-5.0.png", caption: "Microsoft Excel 5.0 was released in 1993.") edit: fixed unused inset param

padjo 2y ago
Looks like it has a bug, the inset parameter is unused
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- airstrike 2y ago
  Whoops, thanks. Wrote this one-off and never needed to change the inset so didn't catch that. Fixed!

smartmic 2y ago

These 6 lines actually put me off. Probably I have to read more about Typst syntax but, same for me, consistent syntax which covers necessary complexity wins over bending a markup language for purposes for which it was never intended.

josephg 2y ago
It’s best not to think of it as a markup language. It’s a programming language designed around the needs of outputting pdfs. Structurally it’s like a modern, nice version of php, only it’s built for academic articles rather than emitting websites. The code snippet there packs in about 8 typst concepts all at once. It’s like if someone showed off how “simple” c++ is by showing some template-heavy magic. It’s straightforward once you’ve spent time with the language, but it’s a pretty terrible place to start learning typst. (That example shows expression mode, block mode, function calling, tags, named arguments, and probably more. Whew!)
- gauge_field 2y ago
  That is a great analogy. When I wrote my note/hws in latex, I had the urge to go look for a package more frequently. When I started converting those docs into typst, I was able to hack around more easily, it really did feel like a modern programming language that has great error messages and that I enjoyed writing in. It did not feel complex, especially with the help of compiler errors messages
__mharrison__ 2y ago
It's a little odd at first. I would recommend reading through the tutorial (which is quite good) and you might start to see some of the method to the madness.

orangeboats 2y ago

It may be similar to Markdown if you squint your eyes real hard, but it's not Markdown. Furthermore, quoting a random snippet without any elaboration is unhelpful and only serves to confuse people (as it already did for the other comment!) # means "evaluate". figure(...) is the function being evaluated. The syntax inside figure(...) is fairly regular, not too different from what you'd see in typical programming languages (but with a document-oriented twist like the %). <figure> may seem to be related syntatically to #figure(...), but it's not. It's just a label. Like an HTML div tag with id="figure". It can very well be changed to <foo> in your example and it'd still work.

SkiFire13 2y ago

Was do you find inconsistent here? It seems pretty consistent to me, except maybe the <figure>

chrisweekly 2y ago
and that <figure> tag is kind of moot -- as another commenter mentioned, it could have been some other html tag like a div
- SkiFire13 2y ago
  It's not a tag, there aren't even HTML/XML tags in Typst. The effect of that <figure> is giving the #figure(...) element the label `figure` (i.e. the name is what's inside the <>). Probably using the label "figure" was not the best choice for an example, something like <my_figure> would have been a bit less confusing showing that it is an arbitrary name/id that you choose. Edit: and I think you also misinterpreted the other comment about the <div>. It wasn't about using <div> in place of <figure>, but rather that using <figure> in typst does the same thing as id="figure" in HTML.
  - chrisweekly 2y ago
    I stand corrected. Thanks for the detailed info.